Patent Injunctions: Is There Life After "eBay v. MercExchange"?

When both sides claim victory, it usually means no one is happy. Such is the sentiment following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a closely watched patent case, eBay v. MercExchange. The key question was how easy it should be for a patent owner to put a stop to infringing activity. Should an injunction issue as a matter of course? Or must a patent owner demonstrate special circumstances? The answer isn’t self-evident; the two lower courts took essentially opposite views. Calling Solomon’s bluff, the Supreme Court appears to have split the case.

Businesses that live and die by their patents – high-tech upstarts, big pharma companies and outfits that amass patents instead of making products (the much-maligned "patent trolls") – favor easy injunctions. Imagine, they argue, if anyone could set up house on your property and a court refused to kick them off. Patents supposedly provide the right to exclude others. How real is that right if the most a court will do is order a squatter