Shutterstock_199059257

Measuring patent damages — and excluding reexam evidence

The Federal Circuit again tightened the criteria for setting damages awards in patent infringement cases. But, in a bit of good news for infringement plaintiffs, it lent further support to the general inclination of district courts to exclude evidence of non-final results of patent reexaminations by the U.S. Patent

Shutterstock_122546788Apple settles

Apple has settled up to $841 million of antitrust claims by state attorneys-general and a nationwide class of consumers who bought e-books from Apple and its publisher co-conspirators.

The pact comes almost a year after U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in New York held Apple civilly liable for conspiracy to fix prices, a

E-bookDid Apple collude with publishers to jack up the price of e-books?

You betcha, U.S. District Judge Denise L. Cote ruled in Manhattan today after a three-week trial.

NYT story here, WSJ there.

A damages trial will follow.

Apple pursued a nutty defense, which held that it and the publishers did no wrong

A law prof at a small school in the Golden State opined that the jury in Apple v. Samsung went Way Too Far when on August 24 it awarded Apple almost $1.05 billion after finding that Samsung copied — very much on purpose — Apple's smartphone designs.

His analysis? That an "average smartphone may arguably

Talk about goofy.

Today's WSJ — The Wall Street Journal — includes a column that gets antitrust law so wrong you wonder why the paper's pundits, who include those who write the official editorials, bother.

The column in question takes aim at the U.S. Department of Justice's case that calls Apple and five book publishers