Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Showing 305–320 of 336 results
-
Conception vs. copying: A patent case
April / May 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 425
Abstract: It’s wrong to copy another’s work — but, when a patent is involved, the line between conception and copying can be blurred by various arrangements between the parties involved. This article discusses a patent infringement case in which the defendant argued that its copying made it a “prior inventor” and, thus, invalidated the patent claims at issue. Solvay S.A. v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., 2009-1161, Oct. 13, 2010 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Generic drug draws preliminary injunction
April / May 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 535
Abstract: A label for an asthma drug indicated that it could be administered once or twice daily, but the patents described once-daily treatment. Another company sought FDA approval to manufacture and sell a generic version of the drug for twice-daily use. The original manufacturer sought a preliminary injunction barring the applicant from launching its version of the drug. The district court issued the injunction, and the applicant appealed. But, as this article details, the Federal Circuit affirmed the granting of the preliminary injunction. AstraZeneca LP v. Apotex, Inc., Nos. 2009-1381, 2009-1424, Nov. 1, 2010 (Fed. Cir.)
-
A view to a trademark – Gun manufacturer turns to 007 for help
April / May 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 626
Abstract: When a gun manufacturer filed an application for a trademark on the product configuration design of certain firearms, the trademark examiner rejected the registration on the grounds that the design wasn’t inherently distinctive — and the examiner wasn’t persuaded by the manufacturer’s argument that the handgun design had acquired distinctiveness. The manufacturer appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), citing evidence of distinctiveness in the public’s mind, including widespread recognition of the product’s use in the popular James Bond movies. This article looks at the TTAB’s decision. In re Carl Walther GmbH, No. 77096523, Oct. 26, 2010 (T.T.A.B.)
-
Do online music providers need a license? The Second Circuit logs on and weighs in
April / May 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 905
Abstract: Are music downloads also public performances of the musical work, for which the copyright owners must separately and additionally be compensated? That was the issue facing a U.S. Circuit Court after a district court held that they weren’t, and that public performance licenses for download services were not needed. This article shows how, in rendering its decision, the circuit court made a distinction between downloading and streaming — and a sidebar shows how the court determined what it felt to be a proper royalty rate for streaming music. U.S. v. ASCAP, 09-0539-cv (L), Sept. 28, 2010 (2nd Cir.)
-
When patent > trademark
February / March 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 412
Abstract: When a manufacturer of round beach towels learned that a distributor was selling similar towels, the owner sued two of the distributor’s retailer customers for unauthorized use of his trademark. On behalf of these customers, the distributor sued the plaintiff to invalidate the mark. The district court ruled in the distributor’s favor, finding that the round beach towel was functional and, therefore, not eligible for trade dress protection. This article explains why the decision was upheld on appeal, and explains that trademark protection is not as strong as patent protection. Jay Franco & Sons, Inc. v. Franek, No. 09-2155, August 11, 2010 (7th Cir.)
-
Can a private party enforce a federal statute?
February / March 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 377
Abstract: A patent attorney purchased bow ties marked with numbers for two patents that expired in 1954 and 1955. He brought a qui tam action against the clothier under the false marking statute, which prohibits marking an unpatented article, in a way that indicates the article is patented, for purposes of deceiving the public. But the district court dismissed this particular action, finding that the attorney lacked standing to bring the claim because he’d failed to show that the government had suffered an injury. This article discusses the particulars of the qui tam provision. Stauffer v. Brooks Bros., Inc., Nos. 2009-1428, 2009-1430, 2009-1453, August 31, 2010 (Fed. Cir.)
-
Patentability after Bilski – USPTO issues interim guidance on process claims
February / March 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 772
Abstract: In a landmark decision last year, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the machine-or-transformation test isn’t the sole test for determining whether a business method or similar process is patentable. In light of that ruling, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued interim guidance providing valuable insight on the types of claims that might qualify for patents. This article discusses the factors that favor patentability, along with those factors that oppose it. Bilski v. Kappos, No. 08-964, June 28, 2010 (Supreme Court)
-
Any given Sunday – Fourth Circuit makes the call on fair use
February / March 2011
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 919
Abstract: When an artist’s drawing was “mistakenly” used in the production of a professional football team’s logo during the team’s first seasons, the Fourth Circuit affirmed a jury’s verdict that the artist’s copyright had been infringed. The artist subsequently sought an injunction prohibiting all current uses of the logo and requiring destruction of all items with it, including several highlight films. The defendants claimed fair use. This article discusses the four factors that may be used to determine whether a particular use is fair. Although the court decided in favor of the plaintiff, a sidebar discusses how it ruled differently regarding use of the logo in the team’s headquarters. Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Limited Partnership, No. 08-2381, Sept. 2, 2010 (4th Cir.)
-
6 updated exemptions for permissible copyright circumvention
Year End 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 438
Abstract: The Librarian of Congress recently released an updated list of exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA generally prohibits the circumvention of access-control technologies used by copyright owners to protect their works. But the exemptions allow users of certain types of works to circumvent such controls to make noninfringing uses of such works. This article describes the six exemptions from this year’s updated list.
-
Fair enough? How the nominative fair use doctrine can apply to domain names
Year End 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 535
Abstract: Since practically the dawn of the Internet, trademark holders have had to contend with third parties using their marks in domain names to draw traffic to nonaffiliated Web sites. Unfortunately for the mark holders, some of these third parties can wield the “nominative fair use” doctrine as a defense to infringement liability. This article covers the case of Toyota Motor Sales v. Tabari, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reiterated how the doctrine can apply to domain names.
-
Absolutely crust fallen – Court blocks trade secret defendant from new job
Year End 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 981
Abstract: As long as a departing employee isn’t bound by a noncompete agreement, he or she is free to work wherever he or she chooses, right? Not according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Botticella. This article elaborates on the details.
-
Supreme Court rules on process patentability tests
Year End 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 665
Abstract: The question of the appropriate test for determining whether a business method or similar process is patentable finally made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court this year. But anyone hoping for a bright-line rule is in for a letdown. This article looks at the case of Bilski v. Kappos, in which the Court refused to hold the machine-or-transformation test put forth by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2008 as the sole test for patentability of a business method claim.
-
Phrased and confused – Court weighs trademark protection for board game
October / November 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 633
Abstract: The district court in a recent case found a trademark merely descriptive and, thus, not entitled to federal trademark protection. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit applied both the “imagination test” and the “competitors’ needs test” to differentiate between suggestive and descriptive marks.
-
Guilt by association – Trademark case addresses “dilution by tarnishment”
October / November 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 452
Abstract: In 1998, the international lingerie company that uses the trade name “Victoria’s Secret” sued a retail outlet that sold sex-related products and operated under a similar name. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that the plaintiff must show actual harm to its mark, rather than just a likelihood of harm. Congress then passed the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, which made “likelihood” sufficient. When the case returned to the district court, it applied the act and found a likelihood of dilution by tarnishment. The defendants appealed. This article discusses the results and the current status of the law.
-
Google cries “Vive la différence!” in patent case
October / November 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 426
Abstract: Consumers aren’t the only ones who depend on online auctions. Google, for example, uses them to determine the positions and prices of its display advertisements. But, in one case, the company faced accusations that its system infringed a patented method. This article explains why an appeals court decided that Google’s system did not do so.
-
Executive misconduct affects patent enforceability
October / November 2010
Newsletter: Ideas on Intellectual Property Law
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 881
Abstract: Inequitable conduct can leave an otherwise valid and infringed patent unenforceable. But just whose inequitable conduct is a threat? This article describes one case in which the Federal Circuit weighed in on the enforceability of the patent of a company whose president withheld material information. Although the president wasn’t the inventor or the patent filer, he owed the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office a “duty of candor” because he was “substantively involved” in the preparation of the patent application. A sidebar discusses a dissenting opinion.