Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.description.abstractIn the eBay case of 2006, the Supreme Court of the United States overruled the then-current general rule granting permanent injunctions agaisnt infringement in patent litigations, holding that the courts should exert their discretion and use the traditional four-factor test of equity to decide whether to issue permanent injunctions. This article is purported to provide useful strategies for Taiwan companies in facing patent litigations of the United States by investigating research literatures and conducitng empirical surveys, so that to find the trends of judicial decisions and factors influencing court’s decisions over permanet injunctions in the post-eBay era. The time following the eBay decision can be divided into two periods. The first period is from the eBay decision to the end of 2008. In this period, the courts specified several factors of consideration on granting permanent injunctions, such as direct competition between parties in suit, patent holders practicing the inventions at issue, etc. The second period is from 2009 to the end of 2013. The courts loosed the standards of irreparable harm and whether monetary damage is adquate to compensate the harm. In comparison with the previous period, they no longer pay so much attention to the factor whether patent holders practice the inventions. The sunset provision was adopted more frequently to proffer the infringer a buffer time to design around the patent at issue in the case. The courts introduced in 2012 a new requirement—causal nexus—and in effect increases the difficulty for patent holders to attain permanent injunctions.en_US
dc.subjectPatent infringement, Direct competition, License, Causal nexus, Injunctive reliefen_US
dc.titlePermanent Injunctions of Patent Infringement in the Post-eBay Era of the United Statesen_US
Appears in Collections:Thesis