Marvel Wins Supreme Court Case About Spider-Man Toy

[CBR News]

In a 6-3 decision, the high court found that Marvel doesn't owe royalties to the inventor of the Web Blaster because the patent expired.


Full article here.

[William300]

This really should have been settled before it got to the supreme court.

[Expletive Deleted]

It's a fun decision, even if I think I (as a non-lawyer) find the dissent more persuasive.

This really should have been settled before it got to the supreme court.

I guess they couldn't come to terms.

[Iron Maiden]

I like how one of the justices cited Stan Lee's "with great power...." And it was a woman (Elena Kagan)!

Here more about her superhero references in her opinion

“The parties set no end date for royalties, apparently contemplating that they would continue for as long as kids want to imitate Spider-Man (by doing whatever a spider can).”

Excelsior!

[CrazyOldHermit]

I'm glad that guy isn't getting more money. I got that toy when I was six and it was so disappointing I've wished some form of vengeance on the inventor for the last 20 years.

[Hi there!]

I agree with Alito's dissent. Congress described in the law exactly what defines a patent and the terms under which that patent can exist. Think of it as a circle on a venn diagram: The circle is a patent, and it is bordered by the terms of the patent. Everything outside that circle, in a free society, is freedom. What this ruling does is extend a "that which is not allowed must be forbidden" mentality that covers all that space outside the circle. Essentially, the Brulotte decision was legislation from the bench: an attempt to define and enforce that which is outside the laws written by congress, as pertains to contracts that two agreeable parties can enter into. It attempts to govern a transaction that takes place in the total absence of a law against it.

The justification the Brulotte decision uses is that such an agreement would be an attempt to extend a monopoly past the expiration of the patent. This is absurd on the face of it: No such monopoly exists! In the absence of the patent, Marvel and Kimble would be the only ones bound by the contract...all other parties are free to manufacture devices that use the patented tech after the patent expires.

Further, the court surmises that we should expect Congress to address the decision if it likes, and that its inaction represents agreement with the decision. Alito points out that expecting Congress to react to poor decisions of the courts is not fair...the court must clean its own house. Further, I would submit that congress has already spoken on the matter by providing clear guidelines under the law as to what a patent is. The fact Congress has not defined all the infinite possibility outside the confines of the definition can simply be taken to mean they didn't see the need. Again, we do not need Congress to define everything we can do. We only need it to define that which we can't do, and it is irrational in the absence of a law for something, that we should assume the law against.

What people don't realize is how far-reaching the effects of Brulotte are. For example, revolutionary drugs and treatments can take 17 years to get through trials, leaving some paltry amount of time those medicines can be marketed under patent. The fact that Brulotte limits the terms inventors and patent holders can negotiate for themselves discourages R&D into new methodology. Essentially, by extending mandate into every space the law doesn't have a definition, the courts have acted to stifle the market, telling inventors and patent holders they can't market their ideas for what they're worth...only what Congress defines.

I don't want to live in a world where that which is not allowed is forbidden...what I want, and what I think everyone over the age of two wants, is to live in a world where that which is not forbidden is allowed. I want a government with limited and delineated powers.

[DDD]

I'm glad that guy isn't getting more money. I got that toy when I was six and it was so disappointing I've wished some form of vengeance on the inventor for the last 20 years.

Was it slip n slide bad? That thing hurt no matter what terrain it was on.