{"id":548,"date":"2012-06-16T18:36:53","date_gmt":"2012-06-16T18:36:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/\/?p=548"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:54:26","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:54:26","slug":"equitable-concerns-of-ebay-v-mercexchange-did-the-supreme-court-successfully-balance-patent-protection-against-patent-trolls","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/equitable-concerns-of-ebay-v-mercexchange-did-the-supreme-court-successfully-balance-patent-protection-against-patent-trolls\/","title":{"rendered":"Equitable Concerns of eBay v. Mercexchange: Did the Supreme Court Successfully Balance Patent Protection Against Patent Trolls?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Within the past decade, companies seeking to purchase intellectual property for the purpose of generating licensing fees have become a major concern for U.S. businesses. These companies are often identified as \u201cpatent trolls,\u201d and are perceived to take advantage of successful companies that utilize the technology by demanding often exorbitant licensing fees. The Supreme Court&#8217;s recent decision in eBay v. Mercexchange rejected the \u201cautomatic injunction\u201d rule and thus weakened one of the patent troll&#8217;s leveraging tools, the permanent injunction.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Within the past decade, companies seeking to purchase intellectual property for the purpose of generating licensing fees have become a major concern for U.S. businesses. These companies are often identified as \u201cpatent trolls,\u201d and are perceived to take advantage of successful companies that utilize the technology by demanding often exorbitant licensing fees. The Supreme Court&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/equitable-concerns-of-ebay-v-mercexchange-did-the-supreme-court-successfully-balance-patent-protection-against-patent-trolls\/\" class=\"more-link\">&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5,29,30],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/548"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=548"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/548\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7815,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/548\/revisions\/7815"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=548"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=548"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=548"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}