A long, long time ago I wrote this article, Remedies of the Infringer, which analyzed whether and to what extent contribution and indemnity claims were available to a party found to have infringed a patent, trademark, or copyright. What does Akamai do to the responsibility of lawyers to think through this issue more fully? How does it impact the upcoming Supreme Court decision?
Off to Austin.
Yup, ugh.
I have been on both sides of the issue presented in Akamai, and I can tell you as a matter of fact that the issue is complicated.
Take the fact pattern of Univis Lens. MFG grinds a lens blank and gives to optician who finishes the lens. What the MFG does infringes as inducement, but what if the party actually sued in the optician? He asks for indemnity. Should the MFG. respond?
Ugh.
Comments are closed.