In its recent opinion, Global-Tech Appliances v. SEB, 11 C.D.O.S. 6462, the U.S. Supreme Court at long last clarified that induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b) requires knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. While the Supreme Court also ruled that this knowledge requirement can be met by a showing of “willful blindness,” and that this standard was met in Global-Tech, the extreme facts of Global-Tech will rarely arise. In the vast majority of cases, there will therefore be no inducement absent actual knowledge that the induced acts infringe.
The level of intent required for induced patent infringement under §271(b) has long been uncertain. As the Supreme Court notes in Global-Tech, that uncertainty began with the statute itself, which hints at an intent requirement, but provides no guidance as to the requirement’s contours — saying only, “Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.” Although courts have generally agreed that the phrase “actively induces” appears to require some culpable state of mind, courts have long disagreed over whether §271(b) is satisfied by mere knowledge of acts that later turn out to be infringing, or whether defendant must know that the acts infringe the patent-at-issue.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
