patent infringement

(redirected from Induced infringement)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus.

patent infringement

n. the manufacture and/or use of an invention or improvement for which someone else owns a patent issued by the government, without obtaining permission of the owner of the patent by contract, license or waiver. The infringing party will be liable to the owner of the patent for all profits made from the use of the invention, as well as any harm which can be shown by the inventor, whether the infringement was intentional or not. (See: patent, infringement)

References in periodicals archive ?
80) Tim Holbrook cites brief examples in remedies, declaratory actions, induced infringement, and the extraterritorial application of patent law to argue that the Supreme Court's recent patent jurisprudence seeks "to bring patent law back into the legal tapestry, rejecting any form of patent exceptionalism.
Based on this premise, it follows that the same knowledge is needed for induced infringement under [section] 271(b).
For a sampling of recent articles criticizing the standard adopted by the Supreme Court, see Soonbok Lee, Note, Induced Infringement as a Strict Liability Claim: Abolishment of the Specific Intent Requirement, 4 HASTINGS Sci.
infringer, induced infringement covers 'other acts' that
Part B examines cases concerning induced infringement that purportedly lend support to the instant decision.
On the other hand, the majority decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, states that a defendant's "belief in invalidity is no defense to a claim of induced infringement.
170) however, this conflict was resolved by the Federal Circuit en banc, when the court adopted the standard expressed in Manville Sales requiring that a defendant knew or should have known his actions would induce actual infringements before it can be liable for induced infringement.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority in the 6-2 decision, put it quite clearly: "The question the Court confronts today concerns whether a defendant's belief regarding patent validity is a defense to a claim of induced infringement.
Cisco Systems, which relates to induced infringement claims.
Belkin appealed the 2004 decision by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to the Federal Circuit, arguing that the jury's findings of induced infringement and willful infringement are not supported by substantial evidence.
Another attorney who specializes in intellectual property, Michael Kahn of Ropes & Gray, said the Supreme Court in its decision "rejected the Federal Circuit's application of liability for induced infringement to a situation where there is no underlying liability for direct infringement.