Patent Licensing: Many inventors and universities, plus some businesses, own patents they do not practice. They instead license we now have to firms that make use of the patents to make services or products. Many universities produce a return on their research investments by licensing the patents that derive from the study they conduct. Lots of today's most frequent and popular drugs got their starts in university laboratories and research facilities. Thomas Edison was primarily a licensor. He was in the invention business, not the process of inventing and then by using their invention to produce a products or services. Despite his genius, Edison realized that he was neither an entrepreneur nor an industrialist, so he centered on what he did best invent. Edison owned over 1,000 patents, and several of which were licensed to companies to create services. In reality, Edison owned one for some time clock, and also the company that licensed it started to be IBM.
Rights with the Patent Owner: It does NOT give the owner the right to practice the patented invention. What a it can, in fact and beneath the law, is supply the owner the legal right to prevent another person by using it. Whether or not the owner practices it, does not take action, licenses the it or doesn't license, pet owners retains the authority to prevent another person by using the patent! There isn't - as numerous believe - any use-it-or-lose-it principle. The owner doesn't need to practice it to maintain ownership of it or even the rights it generates for your owner!
Enforcing the Patent: The US Patent and Trademark Office issues them; they don't enforce them. There aren't any Patent Police. If it is infringed (used without permission with the owner), it is the responsibility of the owner to pursue the infringer through civil litigation. That is, take the infringer to court!
Injunction Relief: There is, however, one improvement in the legal standing of an owner that practices his or her or its patent and the NPE or non-practicing patent owner. Should the owner claim patent infringement, and may the master also take action, one form or relief for that practicing owner would be to petition the court for injunction relief. That is, ask a court to issue an injunction ordering the infringing party to cease production and sale of the product or service which uses the infringed product. In the event the method is produced outside the US, legal court can issue an investment prohibiting its import into the US. The NPE, however the owner that doesn't practice it doesn't need this method.
Sue for Damages: Both owners that practice the patented invention, and owners that do not practice the patented invention, have the identical to sue the infringer for damages. There is a slight difference, however. While each party have equal standing in regards to the things they own and what their rights are, the dog owner that practices may win a more substantial award inside a infringement suit compared to the non-practicing owner. The non-practicing owner may receive damages by means of "reasonable royalty" about the sales of infringing products or services. The practicing owner may instead seek "lost profits" which, generally, are greater reasonable royalty.
Patent Rights: So there isn't any use-it-or-lose-it key to ownership. Other than the authority to seek injunction relief, patent owners that practice their patents, patent owners that license their patents, and owners that neither practice nor license it, all have the authority to prohibit others by using it/them without their permission, and also have the to sue the infringing party for damages. Permission to use a patent usually comes in are a licensing agreement.