ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Quanta v. LGE ruling by US Supreme Court on 9 June 2008"
m (rv to last good version) |
(* [http://www.lawyerofphoenix.com/article-145-Applying_Method_Patents Quanta Computer V. LG Electronics: Reviving Exhaustion, Applying it to Method Patents], (date?→Related pages on {{SITENAME}}) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* [[Patent exhaustion]] | * [[Patent exhaustion]] | ||
* [[Case law in the USA]] | * [[Case law in the USA]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==External links== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://www.lawyerofphoenix.com/article-145-Applying_Method_Patents Quanta Computer V. LG Electronics: Reviving Exhaustion, Applying it to Method Patents], (date?), '''Lawyer of Phoenix''' | ||
{{footer}} | {{footer}} | ||
[[Category:Court cases and litigation]] | [[Category:Court cases and litigation]] | ||
Revision as of 21:38, 24 September 2010
Quanta v. LGE is a 2008 decision by the US Supreme Court which had a big influence on patent exhaustion.
NOTE: this page is very incomplete. It currently serves as a place to document the case to see if there are important aspects for software patents.
The context
- LGE purchased patents
- LGE licensed those patents to Intel
- Quanta purchased chips from Intel
- Quanta sold computers with the Intel chips plus non-Intel chips
- LGE sued Quanta
- The Supreme Court said: "the exhaustion doctrine prevents LGE from further asserting its patent rights with respect to the patents substantially embodied by those [Quanta] products"
Related pages on ESP Wiki
External links
- Quanta Computer V. LG Electronics: Reviving Exhaustion, Applying it to Method Patents, (date?), Lawyer of Phoenix
