Features
Knockoffs: Are They Always Infringing?
When something is referred to as a "knockoff" it typically implies that the knockoff product is similar in appearance to an earlier product and is unlawful. But that is not always the case. Indeed, there can be infringing knockoffs and noninfringing knockoffs. It depends on the facts and circumstances. To appreciate the difference, a look into the general rules and some specific cases is needed.
Features
Fifth Circuit Remands Recording Labels' Copyright Suit Against ISP
A federal appeals court departed from five sister circuits determining damages in a copyright infringement case, taking a position the Copyright Alliance called "a cruel joke."
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit: Falsely Claiming That a Product Feature is Patented Can Give Rise to a False Advertising Claim Under the Lanham Act Federal Circuit: A Prior Decision in an IPR Does Not Collaterally Estop the Patentee in a Subsequent Litigation Where Invalidity Must be Proven by 'Clear and Convincing Evidence'
Features
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Features
Ex Parte Trademark Appeals to District Court — Lessons Learned from the Front Lines
Although pursuit of an appeal to the Federal Circuit may under some circumstances prove to be quicker and less expensive, appeals to district courts are becoming increasingly attractive given recent changes in the law and USPTO practice in defending these actions.
Features
Can a Licensor Receive Royalty Payments Beyond the Life of Patent Protection?
How do you determine if ongoing royalty obligations that extend beyond the life of underlying patent protection, even if agreed to by the contracting parties, are enforceable? A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit shows what types of license arrangements pass the test.
Features
The Seventh Circuit's Decision In 'Motorola v. Hytera': Examining the Extraterritoriality of the DTSA
Can a company's trade secrets misused abroad give recourse on the extraterritoriality of the Defend Trade Secrets Act? Yes, said the 7th Circuit in an important new case which provides a roadmap for future cases involving international trade secret theft, finding liability for foreign misappropriation triggered by a domestic act.
Columns & Departments
IP News
'Polaroid' and Online Self-Promotion: A Cautionary Tale
Features
Federal Circuit Decision Clarifies Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Patent Term Adjustments In Allergan v. MSN Laboratories
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling that reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re: Cellect to invalidate a claim in an earlier-filed parent application over admittedly patentably indistinct claims in later-filed (and earlier-expired) child patents. This decision has resolved some substantial questions about the application of obviousness-type double patenting that had been raised by last year's In re Cellect decision.
Features
Hold On, I'm Suing: Artists' Protests over the Trump Campaign's Use of Their Music and What Some Courts Have Ruled in Similar Instances
When artists take action over political-campaign settings, it's usually in the form of a cease-and-desist letter sent to a candidate's representatives. In some instances, artists file lawsuits, but to date there's been just a smattering of notable court decisions. This article provides a refresher on these rulings as well as a look at the recent lawsuit by the estate of Isaac Hayes over the Trump campaign's use of the classic soul song "Hold On, I'm Coming."
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the RoughThere is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
- Supreme Court Asked to Assess Per Se Rule Tension in Criminal AntitrustIn recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court's notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.Read More ›
- Restrictive Covenants Meet the Telecommunications Act of 1996Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to encourage development of telecommunications technologies, and in particular, to facilitate growth of the wireless telephone industry. The statute's provisions on pre-emption of state and local regulation have been frequently litigated. Last month, however, the Court of Appeals, in <i>Chambers v. Old Stone Hill Road Associates (see infra<i>, p. 7) faced an issue of first impression: Can neighboring landowners invoke private restrictive covenants to prevent construction of a cellular telephone tower? The court upheld the restrictive covenants, recognizing that the federal statute was designed to reduce state and local regulation of cell phone facilities, not to alter rights created by private agreement.Read More ›
