The US Supreme Court Issues First Ruling on Antitrust Legality of Reverse-Payment Drug Patent Settlements (Actavis)

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293867 This short article summarizes FTC v. Actavis, the first case in which the Supreme Court analyzed the antitrust legality of agreements by which brand-name drug companies pay generics to settle patent litigation and delay entering the market.It concludes that the ruling must be counted as a win for the FTC since the most likely … Continue reading The US Supreme Court Issues First Ruling on Antitrust Legality of Reverse-Payment Drug Patent Settlements (Actavis)

The Supreme Court’s Actavis Decision, Or Why Pay-for-Delay Litigation Just Got More Active

One of the most complex and important issues involving antitrust and intellectual property involves agreements by which brand-name drug firms pay generics to stay off the market. In its Actavis decision (and in contrast to multiple appellate court decisions), the Supreme Court affirmed that this behavior can violate the antitrust laws. This post for IP … Continue reading The Supreme Court’s Actavis Decision, Or Why Pay-for-Delay Litigation Just Got More Active

Ars Technica op ed on what antitrust can do about patent trolls

US antitrust regulators have recently developed great interest in patent trolls, which they have taken to calling “patent assertion entities” or PAEs. But it seems like they still haven’t decided what to do about trolls. At recent hearings, critics lamented extortion-like demands, while supporters proclaimed trolls’ benefits to “invention markets.” While they haven’t yet settled … Continue reading Ars Technica op ed on what antitrust can do about patent trolls