Schütz v Werit: when repairing a patented product is permitted
On 13 March 2013, the UK Supreme Court handed down its ruling on the question of whether replacing part of a patented product infringes the patent in question. In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court has shifted the balance in favour of those who repair and re-condition products.
Where the invention protected by a patent is a product, the act of making that product without the consent of the patentee infringes the patent.
In this case, the product protected by the patent was a container for transporting liquids in bulk, which consisted of a pallet and a plastic bottle within a lattice metal cage. Whilst the patent claim was to the container as whole, the aspect of the container which was considered to be inventive was the particular construction of the lattice bars of the metal cage.
The question at issue was whether the replacement of the old bottles in used containers with new bottles by a third party constituted the “making” of the patented container. The Supreme Court ruled that it did not…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the DLA Piper briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from DLA Piper
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from DLA Piper
The US Supreme Court has invalidated federal aggregate limits on individual political contributions in the case McCutcheon et al v Federal Election Commission.
Law à la Mode — April 2014: fashion flair transforms wearable technologies; delivering IT services in the retail sector; and more
DLA Piper has released the April 2014 issue of its Law à la Mode publication.
Analysis from The Lawyer
A new breed of lawyer is smoothing the path for companies entering emerging or unstable jurisdictions
The fragile refinance market is back in rude health and US-style alternative lenders are stepping up with innovative structures to sustain the recovery