Contest the Validity and Enforceability of Patents - Assignment Example

Facebook and Myspace may use the defense of invalid as anticipated to avoid legal liability. This is through claiming that Friendster should not have been given these patent rights as their invention was anticipated. An anticipated invention draws its inspiration from prior arts thus making its products to be predictable and expected by people. Such an invention cannot be a novelty and only novelties are accepted for receiving patent rights (Cooper, 2007).

            The option of showing that the patent is invalid as obvious can be used to discredit the patent rights. An invention may not be anticipated but is obvious. The doctrine of obviousness gives the accused infringers some form of flexibility when the court is determining the validity of a patent. Invention patents which are novel but contain little differences from other inventions of prior arts will be invalid if such differences are very pronounced to a person who is skilled in that relevant art.

The defendants may claim that the patents by Friendster are unenforceable even though they are valid. Even though Facebook and Myspace may have infringed on the patent rights, they may prove that those rights were not enforceable (Schlicher, 2003). This may succeed if Friendster had committed inequitable conduct. This conduct may involve failure to disclose the relevant prior art to the examiners during prosecution. This conduct is inequitable as it accords an inventor with an undeserved advantage over other inventors who comply with the inspection rules. The patent rights obtained are legal and valid but they are enforceable.