SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Aahh...iNEXTV (AXC) The NEXT Thing!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: HPilot who started this subject6/20/2001 9:01:40 PM
From: Kevin O'Donnell  Read Replies (2) of 4169
 
Does Doctrine of Equivalents Ring a Bell?

For those around back when Ampex was fighting it's patent
case with Mitsubishi I think it was, you may be interested
in the following item from the ACM news clipping service.

Nothing like dwelling on past might have beens... ;-)
Of course in our case AXC was granted infringement damages
by the jury and the judge overruled them.

June 19th

The Supreme Court on Monday said it would hear the appeal of a patent case that has attracted the attention of many advocates of intellectual property rights. The high court will review a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in which an 8-to-4 majority found that a patent held by a company called Festo had not been violated because Festo had changed the patent during the course of the application process. This ruling reinterpreted a long-standing patent doctrine known as the doctrine of equivalents, which held that a patent was infringed if some entity made unimportant changes to a patented item and then claimed it as an original device. The Federal Circuit said this does not apply to any patent altered in the course of its application, replacing the case-by-case appraisal of patent-infringement arguments under the doctrine of equivalents with what the Federal Circuit majority called "a complete bar" to act as a standard. However, advocates of intellectual property rights say this ruling could have an adverse affect on patents because nearly every patent is changed, if only slightly, during the application process. Among the groups supporting Festo's appeal are research institutions including MIT and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, and the United States Chamber of Commerce.
nytimes.com
(Access to this site is free; however, first-time visitors will need to register.)
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News