Written by Brandon Baum , of baum legal and Practice Center Contributor.
I recently commented that the Microsoft v. i4i case did not change the law. After all, the Supreme Court simply confirmed that the statutory presumption of validity afforded patents under 35 U.S.C. 282 could only be overcome with “clear and convincing evidence” of invalidity — nothing new. However, upon a more careful reading (prompted by a Facebook post by Fordham Prof. Jeanne Fromer), I now realize I was mistaken.
In the following passage, the Supreme Court explains that a patent provides the user with a “right to use” the patented invention, and not merely the right to exclude others from using the patented invention.
That changes everything, and will make patents ever so much more valuable. By the stroke of a pen, the wealth of America’s inventors has been vastly increased. I sure hope they don’t try to “fix” this.
Tags: clear and convincing evidence, Microsoft, Microsoft v. i4i, patent invalidity, Prof. Jeanne Fromer
You share in the PLI Practice Center community, so we just ask that you keep things civil. Leave out the personal attacks. Do not use profanity, ethnic or racial slurs, or take shots at anyone's sexual orientation or religion. If you can't be nice, we reserve the right to remove your material and ban users who violate our Terms of Service.