A Match Made for Court: Patent Assertion Entities and the Federal Trade Commission
نویسندگان
چکیده
Patent assertion entities (PAE), sometimes colloquially referred to as “patent trolls,” have recently found themselves to be quite the targets for policy-makers. From state attorneys general to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to legislators on both sides of the aisle, patent reforms aimed at deterring abusive PAE activity have been a topic heavily discussed and, in some cases, even enacted. Vermont in particular presents an interesting backdrop for PAE policy, as the state has not only passed legislation specifically targeting bad-faith patent assertions, but the state Attorney General also filed the first consumer protection complaint against a PAE for its business practices. These movements at both the federal and state levels foreshadow further constraints for PAE activity in the near future, initiating the search for the best enforcement mechanism against PAE activity. This Note addresses the explanations behind the rise of PAE activity, discusses recent empiricism on the economic effects of that activity, and highlights the demonstrated inability of other political actors to curb PAE abuse thus far. The Note ultimately advocates that the FTC should become the main monitor of PAE activity and use its section 5 powers to take action against those PAEs that harm consumers and provide no countervailing benefits to innovation.
منابع مشابه
Why the Supreme Court Was Correct to Deny Certiorari in Ftc
In November 2008, the Federal Trade Commission petitioned the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit’s decision in FTC v. Rambus. That decision reversed the Commission’s finding that Rambus knowingly failed to disclose a patent to a standard setting organization and, in so doing, acquired monopoly power in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. In February 2009, the Supreme Court denied t...
متن کاملPatent "Trolls" and Claim Construction
This Essay explores the largely overlooked relationship between claim construction and patent assertion entities (patent “trolls”) finding that claim construction problems and trends benefit patent assertion entities. First, the Federal Circuit is deeply divided as to the proper approach to claim construction. This split is a significant contributor to uncertain patent scope, which is widely-re...
متن کاملThe International Trade Commission: Potential Bias, Hold-up, and the Need for Reform
The International Trade Commission (ITC) is an alternate venue for holders of U.S. patents to pursue litigation against infringing products produced abroad and imported to the United States. Because the ITC may only grant injunctive relief, it has awarded injunctions in situations where there may have been better and more efficient remedies to the infringement available through litigation in fe...
متن کاملUnited States District Court Northern District of Illinois Western Division Federal Trade Commission
متن کامل
Micro Law FTC piles onto Rambus’ standardization skullduggery
The Rambus standardization skullduggery saga continues. As related in the May/June, July/August, and September/October 2001 Micro Law columns, SDRAM technology licensor Rambus sued chipmaker Infineon for patent infringement because Infineon refused to take a license under Rambus’ patents. (SDRAMs are synchronous dynamic random-access memory chips. Instead of running asynchronously (like ordinar...
متن کامل