<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Global IP Watch - Intellectual Property for International Professionals &#187; indirect infringement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.globalipwatch.com/tag/indirect-infringement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.globalipwatch.com</link>
	<description>Intellectual Property for International Professionals</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 03:06:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>CAFC Remands Infringment Damages Judgement Where 8% Running Royalty Calculation Against Successful Computer Program Unsupported by Sufficient Evidence</title>
		<link>http://www.globalipwatch.com/2009/10/16/cafc-remands-infringment-damages-judgement-where-8-running-royalty-calculation-against-successful-computer-program-unsupported-by-sufficient-evidence/</link>
		<comments>http://www.globalipwatch.com/2009/10/16/cafc-remands-infringment-damages-judgement-where-8-running-royalty-calculation-against-successful-computer-program-unsupported-by-sufficient-evidence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:38:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt Peters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[United States: Patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indirect infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market value]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.globalipwatch.com/?p=576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. Gateway, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) partially vacated and remanded a District Court&#8217;s judgment after finding there was insufficent evidence to support damages under 35 U.S.C. &#167; 284 amounting to 8&#37; of the infringing softwear&#8217;s huge market value. Lucent brought suit against Gateway, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.globalipwatch.com/2009/10/16/cafc-remands-infringment-damages-judgement-where-8-running-royalty-calculation-against-successful-computer-program-unsupported-by-sufficient-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

