Alternative Dispute Resolution
Litigation is not always the best solution, as it can become costly and is driven by a complex set of procedural rules that must be followed. Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR, provides other options. If for at least a period of time, both parties can agree that litigation is not a constructive way to resolve a dispute, that presents an opportunity for the ADR process. There are numerous forms of ADR; which is applicable typically depends on the situation. Our attorneys know the various ADR processes and can help you craft a forum for resolving your IP dispute that operates outside the regular constraints of the court system.
The benefits of ADR are numerous — why it is increasingly used and even formally integrated into the legal procedures that courts require litigants to follow. The main benefits of ADR are:
- Flexible Procedures — The process is controlled by the parties to the dispute.
- Lower Costs — Both parties save on costs that would otherwise be expended to comply with court procedures.
- Less Complexity — The rules for ADR are simpler than for matters in court.
- Expert Resolution — Parties have their choice of a neutral third party to facilitate a resolution, and they can select someone with expertise in the field. For complex IP matters, this ability to involve a qualified, neutral party is critical.
- Confidentiality — The matter can be kept out of the public record.
- Binding Outcomes — If the parties consent, the outcome is binding; durable agreements result.
The ADR process is rather straightforward:
Step 1. Select which ADR mechanism to utilize. The choices are:
- Negotiation: The parties resolve the dispute without legal counsel.
- Mediation: Legal counsel present the matter to a third party for a decision. In Collaborative Law, the attorneys for each side facilitate the resolution process.
- Arbitration: The matter is presented to an arbitrator, usually a retired judge or an expert in the field.
Step 2. Select the people best suited to resolve the dispute. In IP matters — inherently technical and complex — the choice of people involved in the ADR process is critical. Their technical background and experience play a key role in resolving the dispute with efficiency.
Step 3. Present the facts and legal arguments in the selected forum and work to agree upon a resolution to the matter.
Is That Infringement? – The Black, the White and Different Shades of Grey
Under US patent law, there are two ways of infringing a patent, namely: (i) direct infringement under 271(a) and (ii) indirect infringement. Now here is where it gets tricky. There are two types of indirect infringement: (i) induced infringement under 271(b) and (ii) contributory infringement under 271 (c). Direct infringement under 271(a) a strict-liability provision […]
Posted on July 8, 2014
Alice, Through The Looking Glass – Is Software Patentable Now?
The previous post examined the ratio of the Alice Corporation Pty. LTD v. CLS Bank International Et al. The Court set out a negative list and a positive patentability criteria, for the third category of “abstract ideas”. If Alice was in Wonderland earlier, it’s time for the sequel – through the looking glass. Patent attorneys […]
Posted on June 27, 2014
Are Software Patents Now The Walking Dead? Supreme Court Kicks Alice out of Wonderland in Patentable Subject Matter Decision
In Alice vs CLS Bank, the Supreme Court found that the patent held by Alice is directed towards an abstract idea and is ineligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C §101. This post examines the rationale and the contours of patents on abstract ideas and posits the meaning of patent eligibility for software inventions. The […]
Posted on June 25, 2014