world-on-shoulders
19 February 2014AmericasMatthew Nielsen

Burden of proof: US Supreme Court backs licensees

What would you say to (i) limiting your liability for patent infringement by obtaining a licence that establishes a royalty rate and prevents the owner from obtaining an injunction, and then (ii) asserting in court that the patent is invalid and not infringed so you might ultimately pay the patent owner nothing?

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Americas
6 February 2026   A Delhi High Court ruling signals more bad news for the Danish pharma giant in the same week that it lost nearly $50 billion in value.
Americas
3 February 2026   Nominations are open for the Life Sciences Patent Network's 2026 awards in Boston, including six new categories and winners selected by leading industry experts.
Americas
29 January 2026   A judge has allowed antitrust claims against the pharma giant to move forward, finding that it plausibly used bundled rebates and patent abuse to extend its insulin monopoly, though one allegation was dismissed.