Copying Products is Risky Business: Inducing Patent Infringement

Freedom-to-operate opinions are often a wise business investment when taking a product to market. A thorough freedom-to-operate analysis includes not only the client's activities that might directly result in infringement, but also the possibility that a client may be liable when others directly...

Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione: Supreme Court Holds Induced Infringement under Section 271(b) Requires Knowledge, Finds Knowledge Requirement Satisfied by Willful Blindness

On May 31, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States, on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, issued its decision in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc., et al., v. SEB S.A. , No. 10-6 [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers / unenhanced version available...

Sutherland Legal Alert: Induced Patent Infringement Requires Proof of Knowledge that the Induced Acts Infringe

By Bill Warren , Josh Curry , and Elizabeth Lester Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court held in an 8-1 decision that induced patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) requires proof of knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A....

Supreme Court's Definition of Active Inducement in Patent Infringement

The Supreme Court's decision in G lobal-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB, S.A , 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4022 (U.S. May 31, 2011) [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers / unenhanced version available from lexisONE Free Case Law ] clarifies the mental state necessary for a defendant to be liable...