Today, the United States Supreme Court announced that patent owners may not override consumer ownership rights by license agreements. The decision in Impression Products v. Lexmark International applies to sales of patented products outside the United States.
Today, Public Knowledge joins a group of consumer organizations in an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court in the case Impression Products v. Lexmark International. The organizations on the brief include the Electronic Frontier Foundation, AARP, Mozilla, and the R Street Institute.
"The granting of improper and illegal patents defeats every object and purpose of patent laws. It serves to mislead and deceive the public, and to subject them to the annoyance of unjust and invalid claims. It throws distrust and discredit upon patented property, and injures the salable value of meritorious inventions.”
Today, the Supreme Court announced its decision in the case Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, affirming the United States Patent and Trademark Office over two challenges to the agency's post-grant procedure for reviewing patents, called inter partes review. Public Knowledge filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the USPTO in this case.
Imagine a tire on a fancy Tesla, a highly technical, complex car made from myriad technological contributions and likely subject to thousands of patents. Many of those patents cover the technologies that make the car run, while others, design patents, cover only the ornamental designs. Generally, a tire's tread pattern is several straight lines that cross each other - and could be covered by a design patent. The tire itself is a small part of the final car, and the role the tread plays in the car’s value is minimal.