U.S. Supreme Court decides for Monsanto and its patent on weed-killer resistant soybean seeds
In a unanimous ruling on May 13, 2013, in BOWMAN v. MONSANTO CO. ET AL., the Supreme Court supported the patent protection afforded Monsanto’s weed-killer-resistant soybeans by saying the principle of patent exhaustion doesn’t permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder’s permission. Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend [...]
US patent court says an abstract idea is not patentable simply because it is tied to a computer system
In CLS Bank v. Alice Corporation, 11-1301, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Washington) ruled on May 10, 2013, that patents held by an Australian electronic financial firm (Alice Corporation) are not valid because the claims are too abstract to qualify for such intellectual property protection. Alice had argued the patents were [...]
U.S. Chamber of Commerce responds to India’s denial of the Glivec patent
On April 1, 2013, the Supreme Court of India finalized the denial of Novartis’ patent on its cancer drug Glivec, despite the fact the patent is recognized in 40 countries. The lay press and public interest groups have centered the debate on pricing. The Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance disagrees. Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend on Facebookshare [...]
District Court Judge offers specific amounts that fit the terms criteria for “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory”
Standard-setting organizations establish rules that govern the ownership of IP rights that apply to the standards they adopt. Companies that help establish the criteria gain an advantage in having their technology included in standards; therefore, one rule commonly adopted is that any patent that applies to a standard can only be licensed on “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory [...]
Apple SEC filing reveals strategy with respect to VirnetX ruling
On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc. filed an action against Apple alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict for VirnetX, and awarded damages of $368 million. Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend on Facebookshare via RedditShare with StumblersTweet about [...]
Still one more judge admonishes experts in damages cases to tie facts of the case to the theory used
Ever since Uniloc’s rejection of the 15%-of-gross-profit rule-of-thumb for determining damages, experts have been attempting to combine other theories with Georgia Pacific factors. Another attempt to use the Nash Bargaining Solution (NBS) to determine a reasonable royalty rate in a damages case has failed. In fact, it may well be that Judge Alsop’s warning in [...]
What can IP valuators learn from the fashion wars?
As quoted in Forbes, Susan Scafidi, professor at Fordham Law School’s Fashion Law Institute, “… design patents exist and can protect ornamental aspects of clothing — if a company is willing to invest substantial time and money.” Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend on Facebookshare via RedditShare with StumblersTweet about itSubscribe to the comments on this [...]
Myriad argued before the U.S. Supreme Court
On 04/15/2013 the United States Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics. For background information, see previous IP Value Wire coverage. Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend on Facebookshare via RedditShare with StumblersTweet about itSubscribe to the comments on this post
Court says lone settlement agreement cannot support plaintiff’s damages theory
After AVM sued Intel for infringing on one of its patents, its expert established reasonable royalty damages between $150 million and $300 million “or more.” Intel filed a Daubert motion to exclude the testimony. Earlier, a federal court stated that it was inclined to rule in Intel’s favor but wanted to hear from the expert in person [...]
Details of the lawsuit-settling Dupont and Monsanto cross-license agreement released
On March 26, DuPont and Monsanto announced financial terms of the technology cross-licensing agreements that also settled their patent and antitrust lawsuits relating to Monsanto’s Round-Up® resistant soybean seeds. Bookmark on DeliciousDigg this postRecommend on Facebookshare via RedditShare with StumblersTweet about itSubscribe to the comments on this post
Share your thoughts...