A software company accused of infringing a method claim is often sued not as a direct infringer under 35 U.S.C. ' 271(a), but as an indirect infringer, either for actively inducing infringement under 35 U.S.C. ' 271(b) or as a contributory infringer under 35 U.S.C. ' 271(c).
Establishing Substantial Non-Infringing Use for Software Under 35 U.S.C. ' 271(c)
If sued as a contributory infringer under 35 U.S.C. § 271(c), a software company can prevail if it establishes that the accused software has a substantial non-infringing use. In many cases addressing this issue, however, software companies have usually failed to establish this defense. This article summarizes the particular circumstances that gave rise to these failures, and proposes a particular scenario under which a defendant may succeed in showing that its software is suitable for substantial non-infringing use.
By
Dervis MagistreThis premium content is locked for The Intellectual Property Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN The Intellectual Property Strategist
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
