• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Antitrust Bulletin >Are settlements of patent disputes illegal per se?
【24h】

Are settlements of patent disputes illegal per se?

机译：专利纠纷的解决本身是否合法？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Initially, we ask whether the settlement of a patent dispute is illegal per se under section 1 of the Sherman Act. Although the Cardizem CD and Terazosin courts have so ruled, we do not believe that per se treatment is appropriate. These settlements are between parties that are not necessarily horizontal competitors. To be deemed potential competitors, one must decide that the generic producer could have entered without infringing. But this is the issue that is being settled (at least on an interim basis). As a result, these settlements cannot be characterized as naked market allocation schemes and, therefore, are not ripe for per se treatment. Whether these types of settlements should be accorded full rule of reason analysis or a quick look can be debated―in fact, we are not in full agreement on this issue. Ultimately, much the same economic analysis will be brought to bear on the issue of antitrust liability. Both the plaintiff and the defendant will have to provide evidence on the economic effects. Moreover, many of the patent issues will have to be analyzed in the antitrust court if a proper determination is to be made.
机译：首先，我们要根据《谢尔曼法》第1条的规定，解决专利纠纷本身是否是非法的。尽管Cardizem CD和Terazosin法院已裁定如此，但我们认为本身的治疗并不适当。这些和解是在不一定是横向竞争者的各方之间进行的。要被视为潜在的竞争者，必须决定仿制药生产商可以在不侵权的情况下进入。但这是正在解决的问题（至少在临时基础上）。结果，这些定居点不能被称为裸市场分配方案，因此就其本身而言还不成熟。是否应该对这些类型的解决方案进行完全的理性分析或快速看待，实际上是有争议的—实际上，我们在这个问题上并不完全同意。最终，反托拉斯责任问题将进行同样的经济分析。原告和被告都必须提供有关经济影响的证据。此外，如果要做出适当的决定，则许多专利问题将必须在反托拉斯法院进行分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号