Through a collaboration among twenty legal scholars from North America, Europe and Asia, this book presents an international consensus on the use of patent remedies for complex products such as smartphones, computer networks, and the Internet of Things. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

In Comparative Patent Remedies, Thomas Cotter provides a critical and comparative analysis of patent enforcement in the United States and other major patent systems, including the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, China, South Korea, Taiwan, and India.

Explains how the tailoring of injunctions in patent law works in Europe, the United States, Canada, and Israel.

In numerous jurisdictions, courts have realized that injunctive relief should not be available automatically in case of patent infringement. Particularly in the wake of the US Supreme Court decision in eBay v. MercExchange, it has become clear that granting an injunction may in some cases enable abuse by patent holders in order to obtain royalties exceeding significantly the value of patent-protected invention or that it may be manifestly against the public interest. This book offers a comparative study of the approaches towards injunctive relief taken by a number of leading jurisdictions, including the United States, the European Union (EU), selected EU Member States (Germany, France, The Netherlands, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Poland), and China, India, Japan and South Korea. Responding to the growing need to provide a comprehensive and flexible framework for the application of injunctive relief, twelve patent law experts, both academics and well-known practitioners familiar with practice in their particular jurisdictions, offer analyses of such elements of patent law injunctions as the following: • access to standard-essential patents; • operations of patent assertion entities; • trolls and patent privateers; • equitable nature of injunctive relief as a source of flexibility; • abuse of right and competition law defences to injunctive relief as sources of flexibility; • analysis of EU instruments that could be used in the interpretation of Member State implementing laws; • conditions for the application of tools such as equity, competition law or general doctrines such as abuse of rights; • circumstances when injunctions should be denied to patentees even though a valid patent was infringed; • complex products cases where patents protect minor parts of the technologies; and • deficiencies and advantages of various approaches to injunctive relief. A proposal for an optimal model of granting injunctions is also included. Given that there is a growing consensus as to the circumstances when injunctions should be available to the patentees and the circumstances when injunctions should be denied, a comprehensive analysis of the various legal doctrines that justify a more flexible approach towards injunctive relief is warranted. This book will give patent law practitioners and in-house counsel the opportunity to draw from the experience of other jurisdictions where courts faced similar problems. Policymakers, patent office officials, academics and researchers in intellectual property law will also welcome this approach.

The U.S. patent system is in an accelerating race with human ingenuity and investments in innovation. In many respects the system has responded with admirable flexibility, but the strain of continual technological change and the greater importance ascribed to patents in a knowledge economy are exposing weaknesses including questionable patent quality, rising transaction costs, impediments to the dissemination of information through patents, and international inconsistencies. A panel including a mix of legal expertise, economists, technologists, and university and corporate officials recommends significant changes in the way the patent system operates. A Patent System for the 21st Century urges creation of a mechanism for post-grant challenges to newly issued patents, reinvigoration of the non-obviousness standard to quality for a patent, strengthening of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, simplified and less costly litigation, harmonization of the U.S., European, and Japanese examination process, and protection of some research from patent infringement liability.

Introduces the concept of 'IP accidents' to establish a new way to look at intellectual property law and its enforcement.

Introduction -- Intellectual property rights basics -- Global intellectual property holdings -- Contribution of intellectual property to U.S. economy -- The organized structure of IPR protection -- U.S. trade law -- Issues for Congress.

"The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) published on Monday, March 15, 2004, a collection of practical case studies on the use of the intellectual property sytsem by indigenous communities of Australia. It was written for WIPO by Terri Janke, an Australian lawyer, and a descendant of the Meriam people of the Torres Strait Islands, Australia."--

This report examines the importance of intellectual property (IP), ranging from patents, copyright, design and trade marks, and whether in the age of globalization, digitization and increasing economic specialization it still creates incentives for innovation, without unduly limiting access to consumers and stifling further innovation. The report does recommend a radical overhaul of the system, with the review concentrating on three areas, and setting out the following recommendations: (i) strengthening enforcement of IP rights, whether through clamping down on piracy or trade in counterfeit goods; (ii) reducing costs of registering and litigating IP rights for businesses large and small; (iii) improving the balance and flexibility of IP rights to allow individuals, businesses and institutions to use content in ways consistent with the digital age.