Chapter 4: Key objections
One judge interviewed for the study acknowledged that “the defense must have more potential than has been realized by litigators” but suggested that it might be an “economic consideration” to favor stronger defenses or that “the client just doesn’t want to bother”. An academic remarked “my advice to clients is to consider the patent misuse issues, but I think they are probably not collectively the strongest defense. It’s a defense you have if you don’t have another one.” Yet only a few of the interviewees thought that patent misuse had no future and should either be abolished or completely subsumed into antitrust. The rest perceived, in differing degrees, a role distinct from antitrust. Some viewed the doctrine as broader than antitrust law in requirements for standing and proof, but as essentially addressing the same issues.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.