IP News
March 29, 2012
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Patentable Subject Matter After Bilski
March 29, 2012
The Supreme Court in <i>Bilski v. Kappos</i>, affirmed the long-standing maxim that laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are the only three exceptions to broad categories of patent-eligible subject matter. Two schools of thought in the Federal Circuit, one led by Judge Randall R. Rader and the other by Judge Timothy B. Dyk, have been competing for development and application of a framework to identify an abstract idea.
'CrackBerry' and Originality in Trademark Parodies
March 29, 2012
In <i>Research in Motion Ltd. v. Defining Presence Marketing Group, Inc. and Axel Ltd. Co.</i>, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board addressed whether Defining Presence Marketing Group and Axel Ltd. could obtain trademark registrations for CRACKBERRY for various goods and services. Research in Motion, producer of the BlackBerry device, opposed the registrations based on a likelihood of confusion and dilution with its BLACKBERRY group of marks.
The COACH Mark Is Famous, But Not Famous Enough to Support a Dilution Claim
March 29, 2012
Although acknowledging that the COACH mark for handbags and other luxury goods was famous enough for that fame to be a strong factor in a likelihood of confusion analysis, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has concluded that there was insufficient proof that the mark was a "household name" that was famous enough to support a claim of dilution against a third party's COACH-branded educational materials.
The Kodak Bankruptcy
March 27, 2012
On Jan. 18, 2012, Eastman Kodak Company and 15 of its affiliates filed voluntary Chapter 11 petitions in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The sale of intellectual property figures prominently into Kodak's plans for reorganization.
IP News
February 28, 2012
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
In re Construction Equipment
February 28, 2012
If the Federal Circuit affirms a lower court verdict holding a patent not invalid over a prior art reference, may the losing party ask the Patent Office to invalidate that patent via re-examination over the same prior art reference? In the case of <i>In re Construction Equipment</i>, the Federal Circuit answered yes, raising important issues bearing on the scope of the re-examination statute, the finality of judgments, and the relationship between the Patent Office and the federal judiciary under the separation of powers doctrine of the Constitution.
Internet 2.0: Jurisdictional Risks in Today's Cyber World
February 28, 2012
With the explosion of the Internet in the last several decades, courts have struggled with whether tortious conduct on a website is expressly aimed at any, or all, of the forums in which the website can be viewed. Two recent Ninth Circuit cases expanded the reach of Internet jurisdiction and may carry significant implications.
Golan v. Holder: A Catalyst for Orphan Works Legislation?
February 28, 2012
On Jan. 18, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-to-2 decision in <i>Golan v. Holder</i>, ruling that the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 — which restores U.S. copyright protection for certain foreign works formerly in the public domain — fits within Congress' constitutional authority to "adjust copyright law to protect categories of works once outside the law's compass." <i>Golan</i>, like <i>Eldred v. Ashcroft</i> before it, solidifies the constitutional authority of Congress under the Copyright Clause to control the terms and duration of U.S. copyright protection.
