[Ip-health] Compulsory licensing of patents under ebay decision
James Packard Love
james.love@keionline.org
Wed Mar 21 12:24:04 2007
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
On Mar 21, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Luis Villarroel Villalon wrote:
>
> Interestingly, this principle of equity as a requirement for
> permanent injunctions also applies to copyright cases, therefore
> this indirect granting of compulsory licensing apply to cases of
> copyright infringement. But, because the application of statutory
> damages to copyright infringement, the price for this type of
> "compulsory license" might get really high.
>
> My related question is, whether on US law, the plaintif could sue
> again and again, based on the permanent flow of infringing acts by
> the same infringing defendant
>
The web page below reports one copyright case where a permanent
injunction for copyright was denied, after the defendant was ordered
to pay a fee for the use of the copyrighted work (plans for a
house). The copyright owner wanted a stronger remedy -- an
injunction against reselling the house, or to tear the house down.
The court rejected these remedies, but said it would consider lesser
remedies, such as destroying or returning copies of the infringing
plans.
Christopher Phelps & Assocs. v. Galloway, __ F.3d __, 2007 WL 438806
(4th Cir. Feb. 12, 2007)
Jamie
> LUIS VILLARROEL
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: ip-health-admin@lists.essential.org [mailto:ip-health-
> admin@lists.essential.org] En nombre de James Packard Love
> Enviado el: Mi=E9rcoles, 21 de Marzo de 2007 11:46
> Para: Ip-health
> Asunto: [Ip-health] Compulsory licensing of patents under ebay
> decision
>
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> This is one current list of cases where courts have denied Permanent
> Injunctions, under the recent eBay Supreme Court decision.
>
> http://www.thefireofgenius.com/injunctions
>
> On May 15, 2006, the Supreme Court issued its decision in eBay Inc.
> v. MercExchange, LLC, 126 S. Ct. 1837. In eBay, the Supreme Court
> held "that the decision whether to grant or deny injunctive relief
> rests within the equitable discretion of the district courts, and
> that such discretion must be exercised consistent with traditional
> principles of equity, in patent disputes no less than in other cases
> governed by such standards."
>
> Permanent Injunctions denied:
> ----
> * z4 Techs. v. Microsoft Corp., 434 F.Supp.2d 437 (E.D. Tex.
> June 14, 2006) (Davis, J.)
>
> * Finisar Corp. v. DirecTV Group, No. 1:05-CV-264 (E.D. Tex.
> July 6, 2006) (Clark, J.) (described on Michael Smith's blog about
> E.D. Texas proceedings).
>
> * Paice LLC v. Toyota Motor Corp., No. 2:04-CV-211, 2006 WL
> 2385139 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 16, 2006) (Folsom, J.)
>
> * Voda v. Cordis Corp., No. CIV-03-1512, 2006 WL 2570614 (W.D.
> Okla. Sept. 5, 2006)
>
> * Monsanto Co. v. Scruggs, 459 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (trial
> court's permanent injunction order vacated, and the case remanded,
> for complete analysis under the eBay test)
>
> * Sundance, Inc. v. DeMonte Fabricating Ltd., No. 02-73543, 2007
> WL 37742 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 4, 2007)
>
> * IMX, Inc. v. LendingTree, LLC, No. 03-1067, 2007 WL 62697 (D.
> Del. Jan. 10, 2007) (due in part to patentee's failure to supplement
> the record after eBay, motion for permanent injunction "denied
> without prejudice to renew subsequent to any appeal by the parties
> relating to issue of infringement, validity, or wilfulness")
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> James Packard Love
> Knowledge Ecology International
> http://www.keionline.org
> james.love@keionline.org
> Washington, DC +1.202.332.2670
>
> "If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks." Bill Walton"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>
> **********************************************************************
> **********************************************************************
> *
> La informaci=F3n contenida en esta transmisi=F3n es confidencial y no
> puede ser usada o difundida por personas distintas a su(s)
> destinatario(s).
> El uso no autorizado de la informaci=F3n contenida en este correo
> puede ser sancionado criminalmente de conformidad con la Ley Chilena.
> Si ha recibido un correo por error, por favor destr=FAyalo y
> notifique al remitente.
> El Departamento de Inform=E1tica del Ministerio de Educaci=F3n le
> recomienda, para el buen desempe=F1o de su correo, lo siguiente:
> - revise su correo diariamente
> - pida confirmaci=F3n de los correos que env=EDa
> - ori=E9ntese de las buenas practicas en el uso del correo
>
----------------------------------------------
James Packard Love
Knowledge Ecology International
http://www.keionline.org
james.love@keionline.org
Washington, DC +1.202.332.2670
"If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks." Bill Walton"