Blog
NFL player uses an image of himself to make a trademark, gets sued for copyright infringement. BARNES v. JACKSON
When a creator fixes a work in a tangible medium they are automatically granted a copyright to the work. The creator can strengthen the rights associated with the copyright in the United States by registering the work with the United States Copyright Office, but registration is not required for a copyright to be granted. The…
Read More
Patent application for food allergy tracking system rejected as obvious. IN RE: KAVANAGH
To get a patent on an invention in the United States, an inventor must file a patent application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. For the patent application to be granted, the invention must meet all of the requirements of United States patent law. One of the requirements that an invention must meet…
Read More
Preliminary injunction denied in trademark dispute between breweries named for ocean currents. LOW TIDE v. TIDELAND
A trademark is something that a producer of goods or services uses to distinguish their products in the marketplace. Anything that serves the purpose of telling consumers who produced a product can be eligible for trademark protection. Trademark law in the United States grants the user of a trademark the right to prevent other people…
Read MoreCopying an API can be protected by fair use. GOOGLE V. ORACLE
Copyright law and software are like oil and water. If you shake them up, they will mix for a while, but over time they will separate. The fundamental problem is software runs on computers, computers are functional objects, copyright law specifically excludes functional things from copyright protection, except for software. In 1980, the United States…
Read MoreApple loses standing to appeal PTAB decision when it settles with Qualcomm. APPLE v. QUALCOMM
When an inventor seeks a patent, the invention must meet several requirements for a patent to be granted but the fundamental requirements are that the invention is new, useful and not obvious. An invention is obvious if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the…
Read MoreJury not given the definition of “willful” $95 million trademark judgement vacated. VARIETY v. WALMART
A trademark is something that tells consumers who produced a product. A trademark can be registered to strengthened the rights associated with the trademark, but registration is not required to begin using a trademark, and the senior user of a trademark still has priority over a junior user that registers a trademark. If a junior…
Read MoreIs distributing photographs of a sculpture for sale fair use? NOLAND v. JANSSEN
A copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted to the creator of an original work of expression. Copyright law protects original works of expression like books, music, movies, and photographs. A copyright owner is granted the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, display, perform, transmit and make derivative works based on the original. If someone…
Read More
Aerodynamic truck skirt patent found partially invalid. TRANSTEX v. LAYDON
A patent is not immune from review after it is granted. If a member of the public discovers prior art which would anticipate (35 U.S.C. §102) or render a patented invention obvious (35 U.S.C. §103), that member of the public can request an inter partes review (IPR). IPR is a trial proceeding conducted at the…
Read More