Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/98756
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor科管智財所
dc.creator宋皇志zh_TW
dc.creatorSung, Huang-Chih
dc.date2015-12
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-07T07:41:59Z-
dc.date.available2016-07-07T07:41:59Z-
dc.date.issued2016-07-07T07:41:59Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/98756-
dc.description.abstractThis paper conducted an analytic study to realize how the Federal Courts in the United States applied "eBay"`s opinion in the subsequent cases. The analytic study shows that a competition between the plaintiff and the defendant in the market is the most important factor for the courts to award an injunctive relief. The competitions between the plaintiff and the defendant can be divided into three categories: (1) the patent owner is a direct competitor of the defendant; (2) the patentee is an indirect competitor of the defendant; and (3) the patent holder is a research institute competing with other research institutes and universities in the technology market. The analytic study also shows that there have been the following four kinds of mechanisms to compensate a patentee who has already prevailed on the merits and been awarded damages but didn`t obtain a permanent injunction relief : (1) without providing any further remedy; (2) to order the plaintiff to file a new lawsuit for the defendant`s subsequent infringement after trial; (3) to award an ongoing royalty to the plaintiff; and (4) to award a compulsory license and an ongoing royalty to the plaintiff. This paper also discusses how "eBay" influences on NPEs and finds that the NPEs with R&D and the NPEs without R&D should be differently considered in permanent injunction proceedings. The NPEs without R&D should be hard to obtain a permanent injunction, but the NPEs with R&D should be possible to obtain a permanent injunction.
dc.format.extent1227269 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.relationNTUT Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Management, 4(2), 2-38
dc.subjectPatent;permanent injunction;"eBay" case;analytic study;NPE
dc.titleAn Analytic Study on Permanent Injunction in Patent Litigations
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.doi10.6521/NTUTJIPLM.2015.4(2).2
dc.doi.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.6521/NTUTJIPLM.2015.4(2).2
item.grantfulltextrestricted-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:期刊論文
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
2-38.pdf1.2 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.