Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
IP News
Federal Circuit Invalidates Parts of VoIP Patent
Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Apple, Inc.
In a near total victory for Apple, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rendering invalid certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,539,552 (the '552 Patent) owned by Uniloc 2017 LLC (Uniloc), because of obviousness. Specifically, the court found claims 1-17 and 23-25 obvious, while claims 18-22 remained patentable.
The '552 Patent is directed to a system and method to police features associated with telecom systems using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), such as caller-ID, call waiting, multi-line services, and codec specification. The patent recognizes that the proliferation of intelligent client devices in communication networks requires providers to maintain control over the use of their networks' features in order to continue generating revenue. To achieve that control, the patented system employs an enforcement mechanism within the provider's core network through which clients send "signaling messages" for setting up their communication sessions. Because the enforcement point sits between the sender of the communication and the intended recipient, the provider can inspect the signaling messages and ensure that both ends of the communication are authorized to use particular features.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
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.