HDG, Everything you just posted is absolutely true historically. Someone on the board posted the ruling in the GSK v Teva case. Somewhere in that ruling it was stated that knowledge of infringement was enough to prove inducement. To me it sounds like that could become a problem for the generic companies as everyone has knowledge of how the system works. Am I wrong. Thanks for replying. Sleven,
"The district court applied an incorrect legal standard, for precedent makes clear that when the provider of an identical product knows of and markets the same product for intended direct infringing activity, the criteria of induced infringement are met."