Main Menu
collapse

Resources

Recent Posts

EA Sports College Basketball Is Back by Shaka Shart
[Today at 12:12:31 AM]


More conference realignment talk by Shooter McGavin
[June 30, 2025, 05:57:00 PM]


Marquette NBA Thread by Juan Anderson's Mixtape
[June 30, 2025, 10:49:12 AM]


Kam update by Skatastrophy
[June 30, 2025, 07:03:58 AM]


Marquette freshmen at Goolsby's 7/12 by tower912
[June 30, 2025, 06:01:46 AM]


Recruiting as of 5/15/25 by Juan Anderson's Mixtape
[June 29, 2025, 01:32:12 PM]


To the Rafters by tower912
[June 28, 2025, 11:26:39 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!


mu03eng

.....in the Supreme Court

https://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-apple-scores-supreme-court-win-patent-design-infringement-case/

The long and the short of it seems to be that the SCOTUS says that a patent of a component does not extend to the value of an entire device that utilizes that protected "component". So if I invent this amazing device and Apple patented a piece of the technology I use and did so without their permission, previous to this ruling Apple could sue for the full revenue I generated with the whole device, now SCOTUS seems to be saying only the value associated with the component can be won in court.

I'm not a legal scholar nor a patent attorney but this does seem to weaken some of the power of predatory IP companies as the reward is potentially smaller. Also think it could increase innovation as people will take more risk that something might be covered under patent but move forward because as long as it's not the "whole" device they are only risking the revenue they would have had to pay for the license anyway.

Thoughts?
"A Plan? Oh man, I hate plans. That means were gonna have to do stuff. Can't we just have a strategy......or a mission statement."

warriorchick

Maybe SCOTUS is saying that  if Daimler Benz stole your nifty lugnut design, you aren't entitled to the value of the entire Mercedes.  That seems reasonable.

It was a unanimous decision, so it sounds to me like it was a no-brainer.
Have some patience, FFS.

Previous topic - Next topic