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"

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links