Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- AT&T Corp. v. Microsoft Corp (1)
- BCGI (1)
- Bayer AG v. Housey Pharmaceuticals Inc (1)
- Blackmun (1)
- Boston Communications Group Inc (1)
-
- Brown v. Duchesne (1)
- Circuit court (1)
- Decca Ltd. v. United States (1)
- Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp (1)
- Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Minn. Moline Plow Co (1)
- Enpat Inc. v. Microsoft Corp (1)
- Eolas Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (1)
- Imagexpo L.L.C. v. Microsoft Corp (1)
- Ninth Circuit (1)
- Norms (1)
- Oral argument (1)
- Rosen v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1)
- SUMCO (1)
- TRIPS (1)
- Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (1)
- Tradition (1)
- US Court of Appeals (1)
- World Wide Web (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bureaucratization And Balkanization: The Origins And Effects Of Decision-Making Norms In The Federal Appellate Courts, Stefanie A. Lindquist
Bureaucratization And Balkanization: The Origins And Effects Of Decision-Making Norms In The Federal Appellate Courts, Stefanie A. Lindquist
University of Richmond Law Review
No abstract provided.
When Offshore Activities Become Infringing: Applying § 271 To Technologies That “Straddle” Territorial Borders, Eric W. Guttag
When Offshore Activities Become Infringing: Applying § 271 To Technologies That “Straddle” Territorial Borders, Eric W. Guttag
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
Patents have traditionally been territorial creatures. The territorial nature of U.S. patents is reflected by the main infringement statute, § 271 of Title 35. For example, § 271(a) says that “whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefore, infringes the patent.”