Peruse the morning papers and you’d think that you were reading patent-law trade journals. If some of you are wishing that maybe you should’ve taken that third-year elective on intellectual property, you’re not alone:

A $1.52 Billion Patent Verdict? Not!: A federal judge overturned part of a jury verdict that would have forced Microsoft to pay Alcatel-Lucent $1.52 billion for violating patents related to a digital music technology. Judge Rudi Brewster in San Diego ruled that the damage award invalid because it appears that Microsoft infringed only one patent, not two, as Alcatel-Lucent had claimed. The judge’s opinion voids the $1.52 billion payment, and a new trial will be held to calculate the damages. The verdict was one of the largest ever in a patent case. A few weeks back, the Law Blog profiled John Desmarais, the Kirkland & Ellis lawyer who represents Alcatel-Lucent.

India & Patent Law: In a case that spotlights the growing tension between public-health interests and intellectual-property rights, a court in India rejected an attempt by Novartis to make it easier to patent drugs there. The Swiss drug giant said the ruling would discourage the development of new medicines, but public-health groups say the decision will help protect India’s ability to make inexpensive generic drugs. Novartis filed its case after India rejected its patent application for the cancer drug Gleevec last year; it’s appealing that ruling to India’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board. Here’s the WSJ story.

Qualcomm/Broadcom: The Bush administration let stand a ban on imports of new cellphones containing some Qualcomm microchips found to infringe on Broadcom patents, reports the WSJ. The ban was prompted by an earlier finding by the ITC that Qualcomm infringed Broadcom patents. The White House has the power to veto ITC rulings. Qualcomm said it will seek an immediate stay of the import ban from the Federal Circuit while it considers an appeal of the case. It’s a big win for David Dull, Broadcom’s general counsel, a former partner at Irell Manella and most definitely not a member of the Law Blog All-Name Team.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/08/07/its-patently-obvious-patent-law-is-piping-hot/?mod=yahoo_hs