1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |ABA Section of Antitrust Law Present The FTC's PAE Study: What Have We Learned?

ABA Section of Antitrust Law Present The FTC's PAE Study: What Have We Learned?

Event | 10.18.16, 8:00 AM EDT - 9:00 AM EDT

Address

Crowell & Moring LLP
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004

On October 6, 2016 the Federal Trade Commission issued its long-awaited study on patent assertion entities or “PAEs.” A joint project of the FTC’s Office of Policy Planning and Bureau of Economics, the study was launched to add to the empirical understanding of a business model that is often at the center of the ongoing debates on patent reform. What did the FTC learn? Does the study alter common perceptions and misperceptions about patent assertion entities? What are the implications for patent reform? Please join the lead authors of the FTC report as well as industry stakeholders for a discussion of these questions and more!


This is free for Antitrust Section Members, Government, Non-profit Employees, and Students. $25 for Non-Members (Explore Section Benefits or call 800-285-2221 to join. Code RAT14IP25.)


Attendance by teleconference or live at Crowell & Moring, 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.


Lisa Kimmel, Senior Counsel at Crowell & Moring, will moderate a panel on the FTC's recently issued PAE report. 


Panelists:

  • Suzanne Munck, Deputy Director, Office of Policy Planning & Chief IP Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C.
  • Daniel S. Hosken, Deputy Assistant Director, Bureau of Economics, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C.
  • Scott W. Burt, Senior VP, Chief IP Officer and General Counsel, Conversant Intellectual Property Management, Ottawa, Ontario
  • Kevin T. Kramer, Head of IP Policy, Yahoo! Inc., Washington, D.C.

Participants

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.

View All Insights