Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Is This Really Patentable? Image

Is This Really Patentable?

Louis L. Touton, Steven J. Corr & Nickou Oskoui

<b><i>Strategies to Defend Against Patent Claims by Raising Lack of Patentable Subject Matter in District Court Litigation</b></i><p>With the Supreme Court's decision in <i>Alice</i>, parties defending against a claim of patent infringement gained a potential way to find an early resolution to patent litigation.

Features

Copyright Royalty Board Gets E-Filing System Image

Copyright Royalty Board Gets E-Filing System

Rhys Dipshan

The Library of Congress' Copyright Royalty Board, the panel of three judges who set copyright royalty rates and settle related disputes, announced the launch of an electronic filing and case management system in an effort to streamline its manual and cumbersome case management processes.

Features

The Uses of Prior Conduct in Copyright Cases Image

The Uses of Prior Conduct in Copyright Cases

Nicholas J. Boyle & Richard A. Olderman

<b><i>The Lessons of History</b></i><p>In the context of a copyright case, a defendant's prior bad acts and prior conduct are more useful to a plaintiff than is typical in civil litigation.

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeff Ginsberg & Dorothy LeRay

Fed. Cir. Vacates Lack of Written Description Ruling In Interference<br>Federal Circuit Vacates Unclear Application of “Causal Nexus” Requirement to Prove Irreparable Harm

Features

What Will Impact Be of Supreme Court's <i>Tam</i> Decision? Image

What Will Impact Be of Supreme Court's <i>Tam</i> Decision?

Theodore H. Davis Jr. & Samuel T. Kilb

In <i>Matal v. Tam</i>, the trademark case involving the name of the Asian-American rock band The Slants, the SCOTUS held that the portion of §2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), that prohibits the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Features

<i>Matal v. Tam</i> and Viewpoint-Discriminatory Prohibitions Against Federal Registration Image

<i>Matal v. Tam</i> and Viewpoint-Discriminatory Prohibitions Against Federal Registration

Theodore H. Davis Jr. & Samuel T. Kilb

In <i>Matal v. Tam,</i> the SCOTUS held that a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), prohibiting the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Features

The Impact of <i>TC Heartland</i> on Copyright Venue Image

The Impact of <i>TC Heartland</i> on Copyright Venue

J. Alexander Lawrence

The Supreme Court sparked a seismic shift in patent litigation recently when it upset the long-standing interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1400(b), the special patent venue statute. TC Heartland held that for the purposes of patent venue, the meaning of "resides" in Section 1400(b) is not supplemented by the broad definition of "resides" in the general venue provision, 28 U.S.C. §1391.

Features

Manufacturers vs. Exclusive Distributors: Who Owns the Trademarks? Image

Manufacturers vs. Exclusive Distributors: Who Owns the Trademarks?

Kyle-Beth Hilfer

The Third Circuit has adopted McCarthy's "ownership" test in determining whether a manufacturer or distributor owns a trademark in the absence of an express agreement between the parties.

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Howard Shire & Michael Block

Federal Circuit Vacated The Denial of an Injunction Because a Causal Nexus for Multi-Feature Products Only Requires a Feature to be 'A Driver' of Demand<br>District Court Abused Discretion In Denying Attorneys' Fees, Where Plaintiff Continued to Litigate After Markman Order Made Its Position Untenable

Features

<b><i>Online Extra</b></i><br> After Years of Setbacks, Patent Owners Try to Turn Tide in Congress Image

<b><i>Online Extra</b></i><br> After Years of Setbacks, Patent Owners Try to Turn Tide in Congress

Scott Graham

Patent owners have taken control of the patent reform debate in the 115th Congress, but it's not clear yet who's supposed to be listening.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES