Under Pressure: The State of Sampling in the Music Industry
Earlier this month, Madonna won the appeal of a copyright infringement lawsuit before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, VMG Salsoul LTD., alleged that a tiny (0.23 second!) sample of the horns from the song “Love Break“was used in Madonna’s song “Vogue.‚¬ The majority held that the sample was too small to be […]
Continue Reading →
Derivative Works and Remastered Sound Recordings
A recently decided court case regarding remastered versions of pre-1972 sound recordings could have significant legal and practical implications for musicians, recording artists, sound engineers, and record labels. Judge Perry Anderson, of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, recently granted Summary Judgment for CBS Radio Inc. in a case brought […]
Continue Reading →
Supreme Court Issues Decision on Treble Damages
On the subject of willful infringement, 35 U.S.C. § 284 provides that, “[T]he court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.‚¬ On its face, the statute allows for broad discretion by the district courts, but the Federal Circuit set out a stricter standard for awarding of enhanced damages, as […]
Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification
Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. One way district courts have attempted to increase the efficiency of patent litigation is through court-mandated claim limitation. When a case involves multiple parties and multiple […]
Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification
Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. One way district courts have attempted to increase the efficiency of patent litigation is through court-mandated claim limitation. When a case involves multiple parties and multiple […]
Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification
Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. Parties filing a patent suit on the basis of a patent portfolio and/or a large number of claims should be aware and prepared to respond to […]
Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Obviousness Decision for the Board’s Failure to Adequately Articulate an Obviousness Rationale
In Black & Decker, Inc. v. Positec USA, Inc., a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent and Trial Appeal Board’s (PTAB) finding of obviousness of two claims. The appeal arose from an Inter Partes Review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 5,544,417 owned by Black & Decker directed to a string trimmer. The PTAB […]
Continue Reading →
USPTO Releases New Guidance on Life Sciences Patent-Eligible Subject Matter
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued new guidance for Subject Matter Eligibility of Life Sciences patents. A memorandum with the subject “Formulating a Subject Matter Eligibility Rejection and Evaluating the Applicant’s Response to a Subject Matter Eligibility Rejection” was released May 4, 2016. The Memorandum was accompanied by a new set of […]
Continue Reading →
UPDATE: Federal Trade Secret Act Signed into Law
Today (May 11, 2016), the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) of 2016 was signed into law by President Obama. The DTSA was passed in the House of Representatives on April 27, by a vote of 410-2. The Senate had previously passed the DTSA on April 4 by a vote of 87-0. The DTSA was presented […]
Continue Reading →
Trademarks in China
Apple recently lost what may turn out to be a significant trademark infringement case in China. Apple, having a registration for the mark “IPHONE”in international class (IC) 9, opposed Xintong Tiandi Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd.’s trademark application for the mark “IPHONE”in IC 18 covering leather goods, including cell phone cases. Apple argued that the IPHONE […]
Continue Reading →