The Supreme Court managed to sneak a few Spider-Man references into an opinion on Monday about the longevity of a patent for a certain web-slinging toy.
The 29-page opinion in Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc. found (6-3) that Stephen Kimble, the inventor of a popular Spider-Man toy, can't keep reeling in Marvel royalties years after his patent ran out. In the ruling, Justice Elana Kagan dropped a web of puns, including that famous line about great power and great responsibility.
Among them:
Stan Lee's immortal line from Amazing Fantasy #15, which introduced the world to Spider-Man, warned, "With great power there must also come great responsibility." (The line has also been attributed to Voltaire a few years prior.)
A prescient warning about the shelf life of superpowers: "Patents endow their holders with certain superpowers, but only for a limited time."
A "web of precedents" (har har).
And "doing whatever a spider can" -- a line from the theme song for Spider-Man (the 1967 animated series).
There may be others -- take a look for yourself and let us know if your Spidey sense picks up anything signifiant.
About the case
Kimble sold his patent on the Spider-Man toy to Marvel in 2001 and has earned more than $6 million in royalties under terms of a settlement agreement. Marvel stopped making payments in 2010, when the patent expired.
Kimble urged the high court to overrule a half-century-old case that says a licensing agreement cannot pay royalties once a patent ends.
Kimble argued that the 1964 ruling in Brulotte v. Thys Co relied on outdated and misguided assumptions and stifles competition. The case reasoned that an agreement to pay royalties after a patent expires would be an improper way to extend the life of the patent.
The case has been widely criticized by economists and antitrust experts who say it relies on outdated market assumptions. Critics say a licensing agreement doesn't actually extend patent rights or prevent anyone else from using or selling a similar product.
But Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the court is reluctant to overrule established precedent, a principle known as "stare decisis," even if it means "sticking to some wrong decisions."