[Ip-health] eBay decision's impact on patent trolling

[Benjamin Krohmal]

Fallout from the Supreme Court eBay decision:

Patently unfair: Court ruling reins in use of automatic injunctions
by patent squatters
Kansas City Business Journal - December 22, 2006
by Chris Grenz

link:
http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2006/12/25/
focus1.html?b=3D1167022800%5e1393007

<In May, the Supreme Court said courts should use a traditional four-
part test rather than automatically imposing permanent injunctions in
patent infringement cases.

"That's a big change," Singer said. "I think courts are doing some
things to rein in what might be considered, I don't want to say
abuses of the system, but some excesses. Clearly, I think it's going
to be more difficult to get an injunction if you don't make the
patented product.">


The new Supreme Court test:
<plaintiffs suing about patent infringement must pass the same
traditional four-part test as any other plaintiff seeking an
injunction. Courts must consider:
=E2=80=A2 Whether a plaintiff could suffer irreparable harm without an
injunction.
=E2=80=A2 Whether some other legal remedy exists.
=E2=80=A2 Whether an injunction -- or lack thereof -- would pose an undue
hardship on either party.
=E2=80=A2 Whether an injunction is in the public interest.>






Benjamin Krohmal
Consumer Project on Technology
Tel: +1-202-332-2670 ex. 14
Fax: +1-202-332-2673
ben.krohmal@cptech.org