IIP

Showing 65–80 of 280 results

  • Phonetic alphabet fails patent-eligibility test

    Year End 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 409

    Abstract: Despite what movies and television shows might suggest, not every great idea is worthy of — or, more importantly, eligible for — a patent. The inventor of a new phonetic alphabet learned this lesson the hard way. This article discusses a case in which the court found that the phonetic alphabet was a patent-ineligible abstract idea. In re Wang, No. 17-1827, June 20, 2018, Fed. Cir.

    Read More

  • Shot down – Photogs lose DMCA case over metadata removal

    Year End 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 621

    Abstract: More than two decades after its enactment, portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) continue to confound both copyright holders and accused infringers. What, for example, must a copyright holder establish to win a lawsuit over removal of copyright management information (CMI)? This article looks at a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision that provided some clarity on the issue in a case involving digital photographs. Stevens v. CoreLogic, Inc., No. 16-56089, June 20, 2018, 9th Cir.

    Read More

  • Supreme Court allows patent owner to recover lost foreign profits

    Year End 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 544

    Abstract: A new U.S. Supreme Court ruling brings welcome news to patent holders who have found their inventions infringed overseas. The Court held that plaintiffs can recover lost foreign profits generated by the unlawful shipping of U.S. parts abroad for assembly into an infringing product. This article reviews the extraterritorial application of federal laws as applied in this case. WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., No. 16-1011, June 22, 2018, U.S.

    Read More

  • Federal Circuit revives soda trademark battle over “ZERO”

    Year End 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 886

    Abstract: When most people hear the word “generic,” it brings to mind a consumer product without a brand name. But its meaning is much more significant in the trademark world, where a term deemed generic isn’t eligible for trademark protection. This article summarizes a recent opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that clarified the test for so-called genericness. A brief sidebar discusses when and how a descriptive mark may acquire distinctiveness. Royal Crown Co., Inc. v. The Coca-Cola Co., No. 16-2375, June 20, 2018, Fed. Cir.

    Read More

  • Why the Federal Circuit voted against a ballot verification patent

    October / November 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 454

    Abstract: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the court that hears all appeals of patent cases, continues to invalidate patents directed to abstract ideas. It applies the test established in 2014 by the U.S. Supreme Court. In a recent case, it ruled that a patent covering voting methods and systems providing for “auto-verification” of ballots was invalid as attempting to patent an abstract idea. This article examines whether the patent was abstract and in turn decided its patentability. Voter Verified, Inc. v. Election Systems & Software LLC, No. 2017-1930, April 20, 2018, Fed. Cir.

    Read More

  • All tied up – Court splits over trade dress, trademark claims

    October / November 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 515

    Abstract: In 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a trademark holder seeking a preliminary injunction after filing suit against an alleged infringer must establish the likelihood of irreparable harm, rather than relying on a presumption of harm. Not until this year, though, has the court elaborated on the kind of proof required. This article reviews the court’s recent ruling and sheds light on what does — and doesn’t — demonstrate irreparable harm. adidas America, Inc. v. Skechers USA, Inc., No. 16-35204, May 10, 2018, 9th Cir.

    Read More

  • D.C. Circuit tunes in to streaming content copyright issues

    October / November 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 661

    Abstract: Streaming media has opened up a vast landscape of previously unavailable content for many. It’s also triggered an array of novel copyright infringement questions. This article discusses a case involving the streaming of content originating abroad into the United States, in which the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has tackled two previously unsettled questions about the scope of infringement liability under the Copyright Act. Spanski Enterprises, Inc. v. Telewizja Polska, S.A., No. 17-7051, March 2, 2018, D.C. Cir.

    Read More

  • Supreme Court patent update – Inter partes review survives constitutional challenge

    October / November 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 864

    Abstract: Patent trolls are a significant nuisance to a range of industries. But the U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld a procedure that makes it easier for patent trolls’ potential victims to avoid prolonged litigation or costly settlements. This article discusses inter partes review (IPR) and the U.S. Supreme Court’s finding that this type of review is constitutional. A short sidebar highlights the Court’s decision as to whether to grant IPR of challenged patents on a claim-by-claim basis. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, No. 16-712, April 24, 2018, U.S. SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-969, April 24, 2018, U.S.

    Read More

  • Giving trade dress infringement claim a shot

    August / September 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 435

    Abstract: The hurdle for proving trade dress infringement is high because a plaintiff must produce evidence of nonfunctionality — and product design often serves purposes beyond mere identification of the product’s source. This article reviews a case from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals where the court determined the plaintiff had succeeded. Leapers, Inc. v. SMTS, LLC, No. 17-1007, Jan. 10, 2018, 6th Cir.

    Read More

  • How the on-sale bar can threaten a patent

    August / September 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 572

    Abstract: It’s easy to understand an inventor’s urge to get a new product to market. But that urge can backfire if a patent application hasn’t yet been filed. Under the on-sale bar, the inventor could lose patent protection altogether. This article examines a case in which a pharmaceutical company learned this the hard way. The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 14-1469, Feb. 6, 2018, Fed. Cir.

    Read More

  • Breaking news – Selling access to clips of copyrighted programming isn’t fair use

    August / September 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 679

    Abstract: In an era that features hundreds of television channels and interactive, interconnected media, video clips have become a hot item. Not surprisingly, though, the sale of such clips by third parties raises copyright infringement concerns, as demonstrated by a recent case heard by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and summarized in this article. Fox News Network, LLC v. TVEyes, Inc., No. 15-3885, Feb. 27, 2018, 2d Cir.

    Read More

  • Can licenses limit competitors’ use? Copyright ruling hits third-party software support providers

    August / September 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 834

    Abstract: Purchasers of software know that it’s not just the license that can take a bite out of their wallets — it’s also the costly maintenance contracts. Third-party providers have begun offering licensees cheaper maintenance and support alternatives. But as this article shows, one software company has struck back, and the favorable ruling it obtained in its copyright infringement lawsuit against a third-party provider may make it harder for such businesses to compete. A short sidebar looks at the defense of copyright misuse and why it failed in this case. Oracle USA, Inc. v. Rimini Street, Inc., No. 16-16832, -16905, Jan. 8, 2018, 9th Cir.

    Read More

  • Bar fight – Court knocks down prohibition against immoral or scandalous marks

    June / July 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 485

    Abstract: Just last year, in Matal v. Tam, the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to the registration of trademarks that could be considered offensive when it ruled that the disparagement clause in the federal trademark law was unconstitutional. This article discusses a decision from the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals that struck down the bar against the registration of trademarks that are “immoral or scandalous.” In re Brunetti, No. 15-1109, Dec. 13, 2017, Fed. Cir. Matal v. Tam, No. 15-1293, June 19, 2017 (U.S.)

    Read More

  • What makes a patent invalid due to “indefiniteness”? The role of functional language in patent applications

    June / July 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 602

    Abstract: Although in 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court announced a standard for assessing whether patent language is fatally indefinite, the limits of the Court’s decision are still being determined. This article reviews a decision from the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals that provided additional guidance — and it seems to favor patentees. BASF Corp. v. Johnson Matthey Inc., No. 16-1770, Nov. 20, 2017, Fed. Cir. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369, June 2, 2014, S.Ct.

    Read More

  • Will innocent, immaterial inaccuracies defeat copyright registration?

    June / July 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 545

    Abstract: Mistakes happen — but, thanks to a new ruling by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, mistakes in a copyright registration application don’t necessarily doom the resulting registration. This article summarizes a case finding that the registration will be upheld unless it contains material inaccuracies and the registrant intended to conceal relevant information from the Copyright Office. Roberts, II v. Gordy, No. 16-12284, Dec. 15, 2017, 11th Cir.

    Read More

  • Case closed – Federal Circuit confirms expansion of liability for divided patent infringement

    June / July 2018
    Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law

    Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50

    Word count: 847

    Abstract: Patentees have long struggled when trying to enforce method patents in “divided infringement” cases, where multiple parties carried out the required steps. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals seems to have come to their rescue, though. This article reviews a case in which the court made clear that it’s applying a looser standard when it comes to establishing direct infringement liability in divided infringement cases. A sidebar notes the court’s rejection of the argument that the conditioning required to attribute the actions of a third party to an alleged infringer can’t occur if the third party isn’t obligated to perform part of the patented method. Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp, No. 16-2386, Dec. 19, 2017, Fed. Cir. Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (Akamai V), Nos. 2009-1372, 2009-1380, 2009-1416, 2009-1417. Aug. 13, 2015, Fed. Cir.

    Read More