The Waterloo Record has some more details (although there’s still a lot we don’t know):
Of the $3.1 million awarded to Bb, there were $2.5 million in lost profits and $630,000 in royalties. I don’t understand this yet, but it appears at first blush as though the forward-looking damages (i.e., royalties) might be limited.
The jury gave [...]
This is a guest blog post by Jim Farmer, Coordinator, Scholarly Systems Group at Georgetown University and editor at the eReSS project, University of Hull.
On September 4, 2007, a summer morning in Adelphi, Maryland, the workgroup, breakfast in hand, slowly assembled into in a large conference room at the University of Maryland, University College (UMUC). [...]
Patently-O has up a PDF of the KSR v Teleflex ruling (which, by the way, was unanimous). Basically, the court says that, while the original precedents provide adequate guidance for obviousness, the Federal Circuit has interpreted that guidance too narrowly, arguing that “Rigid preventative rules that deny recourse to common sense are neither necessary under, [...]
This is huge. Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of KSR v. Teleflex, where the central issue was the meaning of “obviousness.” The reason that the word is important in patent law is because an innovation that is deemed “obvious” is not patentable. For example, Teleflex had combined two existing devices for [...]
