‘가득 차면 기울고 넘친다’는 미국의 특허 손해배상 법리 - Grain Processing Corp. v. American Maize-Products Co. 사건판결에서 얻는 교훈 -
The Legal Problem Solving against Highly Excessive Patent Damages of USA - Lesson from Grain Processing Corp. v. American Maize-Products Co. -
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The patent damages of USA has been increasing since the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit(CAFC) established and Reagan Government's pro-patent policy was admitted in 1980s. CAFC calculated the damages based on Section 284 of US Patent Act, which taken the full compensation for granted for the patent holder. In reality the critical views have mentioned that the damages for the infringement must have been highly excessive award than the monetary evaluation of the patentee invention. The highly excessive patent damages has depended on the ‘but-for Rule’ for the causation between the infringement and the damage. Grain Processing Corp. case adopted a newly contrived causation rather than the existing but-for Rule in end of 1990s for the purpose of the limitation of damages. To grasp this problem solving against the patent damages, the analysis of the legal theories on Panduit Test(1978) and market-share Rule(1989) was fundamental and substantial. This paper examined the legal theories and practice on the patent damages of USA, and described the related issues of ROK with a comparative method.
Abstract
The patent damages of USA has been increasing since the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit(CAFC) established and Reagan Government's pro-patent policy was admitted in 1980s. CAFC calculated the damages based on Section 284 of US Patent Act, which taken the full compensation for granted for the patent holder. In reality the critical views have mentioned that the damages for the infringement must have been highly excessive award than the monetary evaluation of the patentee invention. The highly excessive patent damages has depended on the ‘but-for Rule’ for the causation between the infringement and the damage. Grain Processing Corp. case adopted a newly contrived causation rather than the existing but-for Rule in end of 1990s for the purpose of the limitation of damages. To grasp this problem solving against the patent damages, the analysis of the legal theories on Panduit Test(1978) and market-share Rule(1989) was fundamental and substantial. This paper examined the legal theories and practice on the patent damages of USA, and described the related issues of ROK with a comparative method.
참고문헌 (28)
- 박희섭, "특허법원론" (2009), 세창출판사
- 박성수, "특허법 제128조 제3항 제5항에 의한 손해액산정. in: 특허판례연구" (2009), 박영사
- 배대헌, "특허권침해와 손해배상" (1997), 세창출판사
- 배대헌, "미국 특허법상 시장점유율에 기한 손해배상액 산정", 상사판례연구, 15 (2003)
- 배대헌, "특허법상 懲罰的 損害賠償額 制度의 도입 여부에 관한 검토", 재산법연구, 22(2), pp.217~249 (2005), 한국재산법학회
- 지재권 분야에 징벌적 손해배상제도 도입 가능성에 관한 연구. in: 지식재산 21, "복진요", 특허청, ~ (2010)
- William J. Baumol, "Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure" (1988), Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
- James Bessen, "Patent Failure: how judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk" (2008), Princeton University Press
- Roger D. Blair, "Intellectual Property: Economic and Legal Dimentions of Rights and Remedies" (2005), Cambridge Univ. Press
- Richard Epstein, "A Dangerous One-Two Punch", Financial Times, 1 (2007)
- Edward V. Filardi, "The Adequacy of Compensation for Patent Infringement - An Analysis of Monentary Relief under 35 USCA §284", Fordham Ent. Media & Intell. Prop. L. F., 3, pp.57~ (1992)
- Robert E. Freitas, "A Framwork for Patent Damages Analysis", PLI, 2008, pp.949, 399~
- Stephen Haber, "Patent Reform Legislation: No Final Cut for Examiners", Natl L. J., 1 (2007)
- Robert L. Harmon, "Patents and the Federal Circuit(8th ed)" (2007), BNA Books
- Holmes J. Hawkins III, "Proving Damages and Issues to Consider in Pursuing and Defending the Damages Case", PLI, 2008, pp.949, 523~
- Scott Kieff, "A Keirestu Approach to Patents, Intellectual Asset Management", 51 (2007)
- Michael Lambe, "Recent Development: Going Against the Grain?: The ‘Maize’ of Lost Profits Awards in Grain Processing Corp. v. American Maize Products Co", N.C.L. Rev., 79, pp.1189~ (2001)
- Nathaniel C. Love, "Nominal Reasonable Royalties for Patent Infringement", Chi. L. Rev, 75, pp.1749~ (2008)
- Harvey McGregor, "Damages(18th ed.)" (2009), Sweet & Maxwell
- Robert P. Merges, "Patent Law and Policy(4th ed)" (2007), LexisNexis
- John Schlicher, "Measuring Patent Damages by the Market Value of Inventions-the Grain Processing, Rite-Hite, and Aro Rules", J. Pat.&Trademark Off. Soc’y, 82, pp.503~ (2000)
- David W. Opderbeck, "Patent Damages Reform and the Shape of Patent Law", Boston Univ. L. Rev., 89, pp.127~ (2009)
- National Research Council, "A Patent System for the 21st Century" (2004), National Academies Press
- Herbert F. Schwartz, "Patent Law and Practice" (2008), BNA Books
- Gordon V. Smith, "Intellectual Property: Valuation, Exploitation and Infringement Damages" (2005), Wiley
- George J. Stigler, "The Theory of Price(4th ed.)" (1987), Prentice Hall
- Lawrence M. Sung, "Patent Infringement Remedies" (2004), BNA
- Alan R. Thiele, "The Patent Infringement Litigation" (2010), ABA