Originally published by Barry Barnett.
Presuming harm
For a long time, federal courts presumed that misuse of someone’s intellectual property — things like patents, copyrights, and trademarks — would cause the owner “irreparable harm”. The bad acts, the courts believed, would ipso facto injure the IP owner in ways that mere money could not fix.
Change in the air
But that presumption took a hit when the Supreme Court ruled in eBay Inc. v. MerExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006), that the court of appeals had “erred in applying a categorical rule that injunctions should issue upon a showing of valid patent infringement.”
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/1nIj3Z6
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment