It’s inappropriate for a court to issue an injunction barring...
It’s inappropriate for a court to issue an injunction barring the sale of products incorporating standardized, patented technology when the patent holder has previously committed to license the product on “fair and reasonable terms,” the FTC said Tuesday in an…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
amicus brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (http://xrl.us/bn46a9). The brief was in response to Motorola’s patent infringement claims against Apple over technology in iPhones and iPads that Motorola claims is covered by its standard essential patents (SEPs). The FTC said Judge Richard Posner of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was correct in dismissing Motorola’s request for an injunction against the sale of iPhones and iPads in the U.S. Owners of SEPs can use injunction threats to get favorable terms in licensing agreements, including high royalty payments, which they would not have been able to get when the standard was set, the FTC said. Such threats can cause competition distortion, also known as “patent hold-up,” the commission said. The FTC voted 4-1 to approve the brief before filing, with Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen voting no, the commission said Wednesday when it released the brief (http://xrl.us/bn42r7).