Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1677784
 
 

Footnotes (64)



 


 



Response - Patent Remedies and Practical Reason


Thomas F. Cotter


University of Minnesota Law School

September 16, 2010

Texas Law Review See Also, Vol. 88, 2010
Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-51

Abstract:     
In this Response, Professor Thomas Cotter compares his concept of “practical reason,” which emphasizes the need for choice, deliberation, and communication in the face of radical uncertainty and conflicting norms, with Golden’s five principles for patent remedies. Cotter argues that the application of Golden’s principles would be grounded in a form of practical reason; both methodologies take a nondogmatic approach to making rational judgments under conditions of uncertainty. But Cotter also offers two critiques of Golden: first, Golden sometimes seems to betray a Platonic longing for something more determinate than practical reason; and second, Cotter disagrees with Golden’s analysis on specific issues within the field of patent remedies.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 12

Keywords: patent remedies, reasonable royalties, patent damages

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: September 17, 2010 ; Last revised: September 29, 2010

Suggested Citation

Cotter, Thomas F., Response - Patent Remedies and Practical Reason (September 16, 2010). Texas Law Review See Also, Vol. 88, 2010; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-51. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1677784

Contact Information

Thomas F. Cotter (Contact Author)
University of Minnesota Law School ( email )
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
612-624-7527 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 601
Downloads: 70
Download Rank: 201,967
Footnotes:  64

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.344 seconds