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: The Comparison Prior Art Has to be Within the Proper Scope
On Sept. 15, 2023, a Federal Circuit panel including Judges Prost, Reyna, and Hughes issued a unanimous decision in Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., Case Nos. 2021-2299, 2021-2338 (Fed. Cir. 2023). The Federal Circuit vacated the jury's finding of non-infringement of U.S. Design Patent No. D657,093 ("the D'093 patent") and remanded for further proceedings. Slip op. at 2.
Plaintiff Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. (Columbia) accused Defendant Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. (Seirus) of infringing the D'093 patent, which claims the "ornamental design of a heat reflective material." Id. The district court initially granted Columbia's motion for summary judgment of infringement of the D'093 patent. In doing so, the district court rejected Seirus's argument that its logo within the design of the material "made that design different enough from the claimed design" to preclude infringement. Id. at 5. The district court also "disregarded the Seirus logo altogether in its infringement analysis." Id. The district court further found that the "comparison prior art" was "far afield" from the D'093 patent and was therefore not "relevant comparison prior art." Id.
In the appeal of the district court's summary judgment determination of infringement, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded for further proceedings. Id. at 6. In that decision, the Federal Circuit found that the district court "improperly declined" to consider Seirus's logo in the infringement analysis. Id. While using a logo in a design that is otherwise copied should not be a means to "escape liability," the Federal Circuit noted that a fact finder can consider "an ornamental logo, its placement, and its appearance as one among other potential differences between a patented design and an accused one." Id. The Federal Circuit further found that the district court improperly resolved factual issues regarding "comparison prior art" that should have been left for the jury. Id. at 7.
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.