IIP
Showing 193–208 of 336 results
-
Time out! Trademark fails for lack of intent to use
Year End 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 427
Abstract: If a likelihood of confusion argument made by a party that opposes a trademark application is rejected, the applicant in question isn’t necessarily in the clear. Applicants must also demonstrate the requisite “bona fide intent” to use the mark in commerce. This brief article describes a case illustrating the dire consequences of displaying a lack of demonstrable intent.
-
Alice rocks the boat once again – Price optimization method isn’t patent-eligible
Year End 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 603
Abstract: In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l established a two-part test for determining patent eligibility. In its wake, the decision has left many of those seeking patent protection for financial-related methods involving computers feeling a bit queasy. This article describes the most recent Alice-related decision, which addresses whether a computerized price optimization method is patent-eligible.
-
Drawing the line – Court bars further claims against exonerated manufacturer
Year End 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 516
Abstract: A recent appeals court decision is good news for manufacturers accused, but exonerated, of patent infringement. These parties need no longer worry about accusers harassing customers with infringement suits after the initial allegations against the manufacturer have failed. This article explores this important ruling, including its application of the seldom-used Kessler doctrine.
-
Can online search results trigger trademark liability?
Year End 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 923
Abstract: Until recently, most lawsuits involving online shopping and search engines have involved keyword advertising, whereby a company buys ads triggered by searches for a competitor’s trademarked good or service. But can a customer’s search results lead to trademark liability for a merchandiser — even in the absence of keyword advertising? This article looks at a recent case in which an appeals court answered this very question. A sidebar looks at the critical role of labeling in e-commerce.
-
Is that trademark too concise?
October / November 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 436
Abstract: Generally, an effective trademark is both concise and memorable. But being too concise can backfire on a trademark applicant if the mark is found to be “merely descriptive.” This brief article covers a recent case in point.
-
Laying a low floor for copyright originality
October / November 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 605
Abstract: Things found in nature are generally considered in the public domain and not subject to copyright protection. Yet a federal appeals court recently ruled that a flooring design based on the natural aging of wood was indeed copyrightable. This article reviews the decision, which illustrates how — depending on originality — a work using uncopyrightable elements can be copyright-eligible itself.
-
Supreme Court disconnects patent infringement defense
October / November 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 523
Abstract: The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down a defense that had been available to accused infringers. Specifically, the high court rejected the notion that a defendant’s good-faith belief that a patent was invalid — even if it was actually valid — was a defense to an infringement claim. This article explains the Court’s reasoning behind the decision.
-
Caught in a web – Supreme Court addresses royalties and patent expiration
October / November 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 960
Abstract: In late June, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the much-anticipated ruling regarding the availability of royalties beyond a patent’s expiration date. This article explores the decision, which saw the Court decline to override a long-standing precedential rule. A sidebar looks at some ways patent holders can still seek financial recourse after their patents expire.
-
Federal Circuit puts patent exhaustion doctrine on hold
August / September 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 499
Abstract: The patent exhaustion doctrine was created to limit the exclusive rights of patentees that license, or authorize the sale of, their inventions. But, in one recent case, an appellate court put the doctrine on hold. This article explores the court’s finding that a first sale doesn’t preclude a patentee from enforcing its rights in a related but nonetheless distinct invention. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC v. The New York Times Co., No. 2014-1196, Feb. 10, 2015 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Ain’t that a shame: A musical copyright case
August / September 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 425
Abstract: The popular musical “Jersey Boys” tells the story of the 1960s vocal group the Four Seasons. But the story isn’t over for some of the boys. This article covers a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that demonstrates some of the complexities that can arise from joint copyright ownership. Corbello v. DeVito, No. 12-16733, Feb. 10, 2015 (9th Cir.)
-
Trademark law – Registration requires actual provision of services
August / September 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 607
Abstract: Does simply offering a service, without actually providing it, trigger the federal “use in commerce” requirement to register a trademark? For the first time, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has addressed this common question. This article looks at the decision, which had a major impact on a registration dating back to 2009. Couture v. Playdom, Inc., No. 2014-1480, March 2, 2015 (Fed. Cir.) Aycock Engineering, Inc. v. Airflite, Inc., No. 2008-1154, March 30, 2009 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Running on empty – Decision highlights patent drafting danger
August / September 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 904
Abstract: Patent drafting is as much an art as it is a science. After all, while courts have general rules for interpreting patents — such as the rule that preamble language doesn’t limit a patent’s claims — exceptions exist. This article looks at one recent and particularly relevant example. A sidebar lists circumstances in this case where the court found that disavowal or disclaimer compelled departure from the plain meaning of claim terms. Pacing Technologies, LLC v. Garmin Technologies, Inc., No. 2014-1396, Feb. 18, 2015 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Abiding by the “original patent” rule when reissuing
June / July 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 446
Abstract: Reissue patents allow a patentee to correct an existing patent by broadening or narrowing the originally issued claims. But, among other requirements, the reissue patent can claim only inventions that were described in the original patent specification as being intended to be a separate invention. This article covers a recent infringement case involving dueling pharmaceutical companies in which this “original patent” rule played a key role. Antares Pharma, Inc. v. Medac Pharma Inc., No. 2014-1648, Nov. 17, 2014 (Fed. Cir.)
-
On second thought – Ninth Circuit reverses course on the first sale doctrine
June / July 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 636
Abstract: Costco customers often enjoy significant discounts on copyrighted products. This is good for them, but not so good for the copyright holder. Unfortunately for those copyright holders, a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit leaves them vulnerable to the “gray market” that makes some of these discounts possible. This article explores the case that pitted the big-box chain against a Swiss watch manufacturer. Omega S.A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 11-57137, Jan. 20, 2015 (9th Cir.) Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., No. 11-697, March 19, 2013 (Supreme Court)
-
Something more: Trademark confusion standard clarified
June / July 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 516
Abstract: Trademark applicants can run into trouble if their goods or services are considered similar to those of a third party’s registration, where the marks are also similar. A recent court ruling, however, clarified the standard that trademark examiners should use to evaluate the similarity of two parties’ respective goods and services. This article explains how the ruling is good news for applicants. In re St. Helena Hospital, No. 2014-1009, Dec. 16, 2014 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Click here for eligibility – Recent ruling offers encouragement to patent holders
June / July 2015
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 914
Abstract: Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, the road for would-be patent holders of software and business methods has been a rough one. Some have even suggested that Alice, and its progeny issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, represent the death knell for software patents. This article discusses the first post-Alice decision, which, as it turns out, actually offers some encouragement to software and business method patent holders. DDR Holdings LLC v. Hotels.com, No. 2013-1505, Dec. 5, 2014 (Fed. Cir.) Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014 (Supreme Court)