Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Interactive Methods And Collaborative Performance: A New Future For Indirect Infringement, Josh Rychlinski
Interactive Methods And Collaborative Performance: A New Future For Indirect Infringement, Josh Rychlinski
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
An individual is liable for patent infringement if he infringes one or more patented claims either directly under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) or indirectly under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) or § 271(c). In 2012, the Federal Circuit clarified its interpretation of § 271(b) and § 271(c) in the case of Akamai v. Limelight. However, the court failed to address issues of “divided” direct infringement, where two or more entities combine and together complete each and every step of a method claim, but no single entity does all of the steps. This Note walks through the history of the judicial interpretation …
Business Method Patents And Their Limits: Justifications, History, And The Emergence Of A Claim Construction Jurisprudence, Nicholas A. Smith
Business Method Patents And Their Limits: Justifications, History, And The Emergence Of A Claim Construction Jurisprudence, Nicholas A. Smith
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Scholars, practitioners, and even popular media spilled much ink over business method patents in the late 1990s, eager to discuss the shift in jurisprudence that enabled patent holders to enforce business method patents for the first time. Since that initial period of excitement--during which businesses filed record numbers of applications for business method patents, and numerous articles tracing the doctrinal shift were published--commentators have written little on the topic. Various patent holders, however, have since litigated business method patent claims. During these first few years after judicial endorsement of business method patents, such litigation has focused on the scope of …