Features

The second labor of Hercules was to kill the monstrous nine-headed Hydra. When Hercules struck off one of the Hydra's heads, two new ones grew forth in its place. The entertainment industry's fight against its modern menace, peer-to-peer file sharing networks, presents no lesser task. The record companies successfully shut down Napster (<i>see A&amp;M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.</i>, 114 F. Supp. 2d 896 (N.D. Cal. 2000), <i>aff'd in part, rev'd in part</i>, 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)) and Aimster (<i>see In re Aimster Copyright Litig.,</i> 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17054 (N.D. Ill. 2002)) only to witness the instant emergence of Gnutella, Grokster, Kazaa, Morpheus, and similar services (as well as the re-emergence of Aimster, now known as Madster). We know, of course, that Hercules completed his second labor after figuring out that he could prevent growth of the new heads by burning the wound. However, unlike the Hydra, peer-to-peer file sharing technologies evolve quickly and swiftly adapt to changed circumstances. Thus, Hollywood's plaintiffs are likened more to Sisyphus (who was condemned to an eternity of pushing the rock up the mountain only to have it fall down again) than to Hercules. The most recent example is the decision in <i>Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.</i>, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6994 (C.D. Cal. April 25, 2003).

In the previous issue, we discussed the principle of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents and provided several illustrations of cases that have addressed the same. In this issue, we apply the principle to the <i>Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion, Inc.</i> case, wherein the defendants Hoecht Marion and Transkarayotic Therapies (collectively 'TKT') were found liable for infringing several of Amgen's patents. <i>Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion, Inc.</i>, 126 F. Supp. 2d 69 (D. Mass. 2001). Although the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents defense was not raised, this article discusses how this doctrine might have relieved TKT of liability.

Features

Recent developments in Internet law and in the Internet industry.

Features

The United States District Court for the District of Hawaii recently ruled in favor of Defendant Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and against InternetMovies.com in a case that underscores the broad powers afforded to copyright holders under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Features

Federal law that prohibits sending unsolicited advertisements to fax machines does not affect unsolicited commercial e-mail, the Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled.

Features

Get rich suing spammers or your money back! If offers like that get your goat, you are not alone. Angry consumers forward about 130,000 spam messages to the Federal Trade Commission every day, Chairman Timothy Muris said at the FTC's first Spam Forum. As recently as 2001, the average was just 10,000 per day, he said. The FTC has stepped up its enforcement efforts in the past year. For instance, it announced the fourth in a series of joint federal-state sweeps directed at Internet fraud, including deceptive spam. But there is widespread agreement among experts that existing legal tools are insufficient for the task.

In its first case on Internet jurisdiction, the North Dakota Supreme Court has affirmed a $3 million libel award to a university professor who was defamed on a student's Web site.

Features

Internet law has developed in lock step with the Internet, and both interpenetrate every aspect of a company-employee relationship. From how to handle employee data to accommodating disabled Internet users to preventing security breaches that an employee's juvenile family members might cause from a computer in the home that is also used for work purposes, numerous new legal difficulties await the unprepared human resource professional. This is the first of a two-part article detailing the top 10 things companies need to know about Internet law.