▁to ▁determine ▁whether ▁there ▁has ▁been ▁an ▁indu cement : ▁ ▁There ▁must ▁be ▁an ▁act ▁of ▁in fr ing ement ▁by ▁the ▁direct ▁in fr inger . ▁This ▁act ▁must ▁be ▁influenced ▁by ▁the ▁s eller ▁to ▁the ▁point ▁where , ▁without ▁this ▁influence , ▁in fr ing ement ▁by ▁the ▁bu yer ▁would ▁not ▁otherwise ▁take ▁place . ▁The ▁influence ▁must ▁be ▁know ingly ▁exerc ised ▁by ▁the ▁s eller , ▁i . e ., ▁the ▁s eller ▁knows ▁that ▁this ▁influence ▁will ▁result ▁in ▁the ▁completion ▁of ▁the ▁act ▁of ▁in fr ing ement . ▁ ▁Un like ▁in ▁America ▁and ▁Britain , ▁it ▁is ▁not ▁an ▁in fr ing ement ▁to ▁produce ▁or ▁sell ▁an ▁un pat ented ▁replacement ▁part , ▁even ▁if ▁the ▁only ▁possible ▁use ▁for ▁that ▁replacement ▁part ▁is ▁in ▁a ▁pat ented ▁in vention . ▁To ▁establish ▁indirect ▁in fr ing ement , ▁it ▁must ▁be ▁shown ▁that ▁the ▁alleg ed ▁indu cer ▁know ingly ▁exerc ised ▁influence ▁that ▁he ▁or ▁she ▁knew ▁would ▁result ▁in ▁direct ▁in fr ing ement . ▁ ▁In ▁Mac L enn an ▁v . ▁Produ its ▁Gilbert ▁Inc ., ▁the ▁manufact urer ▁of ▁replacement ▁parts ▁was ▁found ▁to ▁have ▁know ingly ▁induced ▁pat ent ▁in fr ing ement ▁by ▁indicating ▁its ▁intended ▁use ▁in ▁its ▁compet itor ' s ▁product ▁when ▁s elling ▁the ▁components . ▁ ▁Stand ing : ▁Right ▁to ▁Sue ▁Sub section ▁ 5 5 ( 1 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Pat ent ▁Act ▁provides ▁standing ▁to