Monday, March 28, 2016

The Practicalities and Pitfalls of the Smallest Saleable Patent Practicing Unit Doctrine: A Review of Teece and Sherry

Anne Layne-Farrar, Charles River Associates; Northwestern University describes The Practicalities and Pitfalls of the Smallest Saleable Patent Practicing Unit Doctrine: A Review of Teece and Sherry.

ABSTRACT: In early 2016, David Teece and Edward Sherry released a new paper assessing the economics of the “Smallest Saleable Patent Practicing Unit” (SSPPU) doctrine. The doctrine was first espoused in 2009 by Judge Randall Rader in Cornell v. Hewlett Packard. In the simplest terms, the SSPPU doctrine calls for setting the revenue base for reasonable royalty patent infringement damages at the smallest possible product level that still reflects the patented invention. In their new paper, Teece and Sherry walk through the justifications expressed in support of applying the SSPPU doctrine and discuss the assumptions embedded within those justifications. The authors also explain a number of the limitations of the doctrine, both logical and practical. In this brief review, I summarize the key findings reported in the Teece and Sherry paper and highlight the policy implications.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2016/03/the-practicalities-and-pitfalls-of-the-smallest-saleable-patent-practicing-unit-doctrine-a-review-of.html

| Permalink

Comments

Post a comment