A few weeks ago, we noted comments made by Renata Hesse of the DOJ that questioned whether a standard-essential patent holder who seeks an injunction on a FRAND-encumbered SEP might violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act. In Law360, Wendy Fu takes a closer look at this interesting question.
This past week, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., where the Court held that the first-sale doctrine codified in the Copyright Act extends to protect buyers/owners of copyrights works that were lawfully made abroad. At Patently-O, Dennis Crouch discusses the likely implications this will have for the (non-codified) patent exhaustion doctrine. Groklaw also notes that this is a case where several amicus briefs may have influenced the Court’s conclusions.
Several days ago we linked to a blog post by Prof. Adam Mossoff of George Mason University, in which Prof. Mossoff criticized both the SHIELD Act and an oft-cited study on the costs of non-practicing entity disputes. Over at Patent Progress, Josh Lamel provides a point-by-point rebuttal to Prof. Mossoff.
Lastly, if you’re not watching March Madness this weekend, you might be doing some spring cleaning — if so, IP Watchdog has some patents to get you in the mood.

Citation

Filed under