Contributory infringement
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 283 U.S. 27 - Carbice Corporation of America v. American Patents Development Corporation · 1931Most cited · 713 citing opinions
Infringement, whether direct or contributory, is essentially a tort, and implies invasion of some right of the patentee.
How the Supreme Court has restated “Contributory infringement”
Each Supreme Court definition of “Contributory infringement,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “Contributory infringement”
Court decisions citing the 3 opinions that defined “Contributory infringement” — 756 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 3 definitions, chronological · 1907–1931
- ORIGINAL
The doctrine of contributory infringement, which they conceded to exist, should not be extended beyond those articles which are either parts of a patented combination or device, or which are produced for the sole purpose of being so used, and should not be applied to the staple articles of commerce.
limits
The case as stated concerns the liability of the defendant as a contributory infringer upon the assumption that, in the manner described, it assembles the various elements essential to the making of the Grant tire, and sells them with the intent and purpose that they shall be so combined. ... it buys from others the parts that are as much needed in effecting the patented combination as the rubber itself, and sells them in order that the infringing device may be constructed by its customers.