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"
(→External links: fix link) |
(→External links: fix syntax) |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
− | * [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-937.ZO.html QUANTA COMPUTER, INC. v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC. (No. 06-937) | + | * [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-937.ZO.html QUANTA COMPUTER, INC. v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC. (No. 06-937) 453 F. 3d 1364, reversed.] |
− | 453 F. 3d 1364, reversed.] | ||
* [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''' | * [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''' | ||
Revision as of 11:58, 27 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"