Attorneys React To Supreme Court Patent Royalties Case

Law360, New York (June 22, 2015, 7:33 PM EDT) -- On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises that leaves intact a 50-year-old rule barring royalty agreements that continue after a patent expires. Here, attorneys tell Law360 why the decision is significant.

Michael Albert, Wolf Greenfield

“Kimble faced a high hurdle: Abandoning stare decisis requires a special justification, and the court found none here. Brulotte prohibits post-expiration patent royalties. Even if Brulotte is based on bad economics (i.e., the idea that post-expiration payments are always anti-competitive), that is not enough to overturn the law. The majority doubted that Brulotte created real-world problems, noting that parties...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Beta
Ask a question!