Nautilus v Biosig Case Study

Already another month has passed, and it’s about time for another update. Earlier I mentioned some other patent cases the Supreme Court recently decided and how I should talk a little bit about them. At the end of April the Court handed down two decisions both unanimously reversing and remanding the appeals court. For now I will talk about one of them, Nautilus v. Biosig, that dealt with the construction of claims in a patent and opine on the logic behind the patent prosecution process.

Advertisement

Bowman v. Monsanto Case Study

The Aereo case may be a demonstration about how a larger force in the market uses intellectual property arguments to shut down a competition. This sort of behavior is not limited to copyright cases though. Recently the Supreme Court unanimously decided to rule in favor of Monsanto in a patent infringement case the company filed against one of its customers, a soybean farmer in Indiana. To understand why seed growing was worth the time of the highest court in the land, we need to explain a key aspects of patents and how it is balanced against the public interest.

American Broadcasting Cos v. Aereo Case Study

In addition to posting about patent cases the Supreme Court hears, I pay attention to the other intellectual property cases the high court decides on. Back in April the Supreme Court heard arguments on the basis for a preliminary injunction against Aereo for its service to let people watch broadcast television over the internet. Last week the Court decided 6-3 that Aereo was liable for direct copyright infringement of the broadcast television companies’ content. The case involves the key rights granted by copyright and questions about controlling content, so I think I should provide my own explanation on the ruling.

Apple-Samsung Jury Wasn’t Sending Message

Originally Posted on SFBay

SAN JOSE — After two hours of deliberations to fix an error spotted late on Friday, Judge Koh told the jury in the Apple v. Samsung trial:

“Please take a seat for the last time.”

The total damages based on Samsung’s infringement of an Apple autocomplete patent remained at around $120 million. The jury found Samsung infringed on two of five Apple patents, using the intellectual property in multiple Samsung smartphones.

Apple, Samsung Delay Closing Arguments

Originally Posted on SFBay

SAN JOSE — The jury in the Apple Samsung case was excused from the courtroom Friday morning as the court dealt with the implications of a separate appeals court ruling on this case.