ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Wilful infringement"
m (In the USA, the ''In re Seagate'' is seen as having made it more difficult to have an infringement judged "wilful".) |
m (→Cases of wilful infringement: * [http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/09/using-reexaminations-to-avoid-willfulness-damages.html Using Reexaminations to Avoid Willfulness Damages], Patently-o) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* [[I4i v. Microsoft (2009, USA)]] | * [[I4i v. Microsoft (2009, USA)]] | ||
* [[Stac v. Microsoft (1993, USA)]] | * [[Stac v. Microsoft (1993, USA)]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==External links== | ||
| + | * [http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/09/using-reexaminations-to-avoid-willfulness-damages.html Using Reexaminations to Avoid Willfulness Damages], Patently-o | ||
Revision as of 22:05, 25 September 2009
Wilful infringement is when a developer knows that an idea is patented, and proceeds to use that idea without having gotten permission.
This concept may have other names, or may not exist, in various jurisdictions, but it exists in the European Union, and "the willful infringement doctrine" exists in the USA. It may also be called a "bad faith infringement".
Whether an infringement is wilful or not is usually important regarding the fine to be paid by a defendant who loses. In the USA, a court can increase the damages to up to three times the original amount in the case of wilful infringement.
In the USA, the 2007 In re Seagate is seen as having made it more difficult to have an infringement judged "wilful".
