120 likes | 233 Views
Patent Damages II. Patent Law 4.20.04. United States Patent 4,373,847 Hipp , et al. February 15, 1983 Releasable locking device
E N D
Patent Damages II Patent Law 4.20.04
United States Patent 4,373,847 Hipp , et al.February 15, 1983 Releasable locking device A releasable locking device is provided for securing a parked vehicle to an adjacent upright structure. The device includes a first means mounted on the upright structure and a second means mounted on the first means for vertical movement relative thereto between operative and inoperative mode positions. When in an operative mode, the second means is in a raised position and interlockingly engages a portion of the parked vehicle. A third means is provided which releasably retains the second means in an operative mode and prevents accidental movement of the second means from an operative mode position to a lower inoperative mode position. The first means includes guides for restricting movement of the second means to a substantially vertical path. Inventors: Hipp; Steven J. (Milwaukee, WI); Hahn; Norbert (Cudahy, WI) Assignee: Rite-Hite Corporation (Cudahy, WI) Appl. No.: 260340Filed: May 4, 1981
Proper Compensation • PP. 1101 et seq: “Property rule” vs. “liability rule” • Injunction vs damages; K vs property • Majority: Higher damages appropriate here; foreseeable harm to patentee’s market • Dissent: No, good reasons for lower damages here: (1) Reward for commercialization, not “fallow” inventions; (2) Injury to property right, not market
Grain Processing • 4 production processes; one (# 4) non-infringing • “Practically instantaneous” transition from infringing process to noninfringing one • See why this is important? • But Process 4 was not actually used . . .
Other damage theories • Price erosion • Market share rule • Lost sales of related but unpatented products • Post-expiration sales Not just lost sales, but lower price—because infringer provides price competition Larry Solum, USD Law School
Other damage theories • Price erosion • Market share rule • Lost sales of related but unpatented products • Post-expiration sales Relative market share of patentee relative to non-infringers would remain the same without the infringer.
Other damage theories • Price erosion • Market share rule • Lost sales of related but unpatented products • Post-expiration sales Components and other related products which are normally sold with the patented product.
Other damage theories • Price erosion • Market share rule • Lost sales of related but unpatented products • Post-expiration sales Head-start theory. Competitor cannot enter market immediately post-expiration.