Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Redefining Prior Art Under Proposed Patent Reform Measures
This is the first installment of a two-part series on the proposed move from a patent system granting priority of patent rights based upon invention dates to a system in which priority is based primarily upon filing dates. This installment discusses the history behind the current first-to-invent system, the current patent reform movement, and the basic proposed change to the current system. The second installment will delve into the effects such changes will have on patentees and practitioners.
The Movement To Redefine Prior Art
In recent history, as both social and economic globalization have increased, so have the problems arising from differences between international and domestic patent policies. In response, the U.S. Congress has first proposed various short-term solutions attempting to harmonize such differences without major amendment to the underlying statutes. [See, e.g., American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999.] This has proven insufficient. In the last few years, calls for major redefinition of the differing aspects of domestic patent policy have increased. [See, e.g., Patent Reform Act of 2005; Patent Reform Act of 2006.] There has been significant debate in Congress over new patent legislation, and the proposed bills currently appear to be stalled in the Senate. However, of important note, the debate is not centered on the shift from a first-to-invent to a first-to-file system. No matter how the remaining provisions are amended, there appears to be widespread support for this fundamental change to the U.S. patent system. As a result, this is where we focus our discussion in this article.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.