Response - Patent Remedies and Practical Reason

12 Pages Posted: 17 Sep 2010 Last revised: 7 Dec 2014

See all articles by Thomas F. Cotter

Thomas F. Cotter

University of Minnesota Law School

Date Written: September 16, 2010


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.

Keywords: patent remedies, reasonable royalties, patent damages

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:

Thomas F. Cotter (Contact Author)

University of Minnesota Law School ( email )

229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
612-624-7527 (Phone)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics