Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

IP NEWS Image

IP NEWS

Kathlyn Card-Beckles

Highlights of the latest intellectual property news and cases from around the country.

Features

Fraud in Procurement of Registration Concerning Use of Mark Taints Entire Trademark Application for Stents Image

Fraud in Procurement of Registration Concerning Use of Mark Taints Entire Trademark Application for Stents

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

In <i>Medinol Ltd. v. Neuro Vasx, Inc.</i> (Cancellation No. 92040535), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) agreed to enter summary judgment in favor of Medinol canceling Neuro Vasx's trademark registration for NEUROVASX based on fraud on the PTO. In August 2000, Neuro Vasx, was granted a registration for the mark NEUROVASX for 'medical devices, namely neurological stents and catheters.' As a result of this registration, Medinol's application for registration of the mark NIROVASCULAR for 'medical devices, namely stents' was refused.

The Paxil Case: Composition of Matter Claims, Polymorphs and 'Follow-on' Patents Image

The Paxil Case: Composition of Matter Claims, Polymorphs and 'Follow-on' Patents

Ivor R. Elrifi & Nicholas P. Triano, III

The growth of the pharmaceutical industry over the past 20 years has been driven by the R&amp;D investment in discovering new compounds, which can be protected by composition of matter patent claims. There are notable exceptions to this rule, <i>eg,</i> an unexpected and lucrative use for an old compound, like topically-applied minoxidil for hair growth (Rogaine'). But composition of matter patent protection on the active product itself is always a primary plank in protecting a drug franchise, and increases the value of the technology significantly.

Features

Contributory Copyright Infringement and Peer-to-Peer Networks Image

Contributory Copyright Infringement and Peer-to-Peer Networks

Rufus J. Pichler

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).

Application of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents to Amgen v. Hoechst Marion, Inc. Image

Application of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents to Amgen v. Hoechst Marion, Inc.

Justin S. Rerko

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

Net News Image

Net News

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent developments in Internet law and in the Internet industry.

Features

Proof of Infringement Not Required To Obtain Injunction Under DMCA Image

Proof of Infringement Not Required To Obtain Injunction Under DMCA

Samuel B. Fineman, Esq., Editor-In-Chief

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

PA Law Covers Just the Fax, Not the E-Mail Image

PA Law Covers Just the Fax, Not the E-Mail

Jennifer Batchelor

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

Features

FTC Struggles To Gain Ground In War On Spam Image

FTC Struggles To Gain Ground In War On Spam

Gary Young

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.

'Effects Test' for Jurisdiction Gets Another Nod Image

'Effects Test' for Jurisdiction Gets Another Nod

Dee McAree

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.

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

  • Artist Challenges Copyright Office Refusal to Register Award-Winning AI-Assisted Work
    Copyright law has long struggled to keep pace with advances in technology, and the debate around the copyrightability of AI-assisted works is no exception. At issue is the human authorship requirement: the principle that a work must have a human author to be eligible for copyright protection. While the Copyright Office has previously cited this "bedrock requirement of copyright" to reject registrations, recent decisions have focused on the role of human authorship in the context of AI.
    Read More ›
  • Recently Introduced Bill Would Limit ITC 'Domestic Industry by Subpoena'
    Patent infringement disputes in the United States are not only heard in district courts. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) also decides high-stakes intellectual property disputes — with the remedy for the IP rights holder not being damages, but rather an exclusion order that can block a competitor's importation of infringing articles into the U.S. That remedy can be incredibly powerful for companies engaged in stiff competition in the U.S. market.
    Read More ›
  • 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.
    Read More ›