A student-run resource for reliable reports on the latest law and technology news

Patenting Bioprinting

By Jasper L. Tran – Edited by Henry Thomas

Bioprinting, the3D-printing living tissues, is real and may be widely available in the near future. This emerging technology has generated controversies about its regulation; the Gartner analyst group speculates a global debate in 2016 about whether to regulate bioprinting or ban it altogether. Another equally important issue which this paper will explore is whether bioprinting is patentable.



More than a White Rabbit: Alice Requires Substantial Difference Prior to Embarking on Patent Eligibility

By Allison E. Butler – Edited by Travis West

On June 19, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its first software patent case in thirty-three years. The impact of Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank is broad but it appears to be a decision that was long overdue to address the many issues facing patentability of subject matter eligibility in various arenas where such issues are dominant.



Legal and Policy Aspects of the Intersection Between Cloud Computing and the U.S. Healthcare Industry

By Ariella Michal Medows – Edited by Kenneth Winterbottom

The U.S. healthcare industry is undergoing a technological revolution, inspiring complicated questions regarding patient privacy and the security of stored personal health information. How can our society capitalize on the benefits of digitization while also adequately addressing these concerns?



Net Neutrality Developments in the European Union

By Angela Daly – Edited by Katherine Zimmerman

This contribution will consider current moves in the European Union to legislate net neutrality regulation at the regional level. The existing regulatory landscape governing Internet Service Providers in the EU will be outlined, along with net neutrality initiatives at the national level in countries such as Slovenia and the Netherlands. The new proposals to introduce enforceable net neutrality rules throughout the EU will be detailed, with comparison made to the recent FCC proposals in the US, and the extent to which these proposals can be considered adequate to advance the interests of Internet users.



Newegg Wins Patent Troll Case After Court Delays

By Kasey Wang – Edited by Yunnan Jiang and Travis West

The District Court for the Eastern District of Texas recently issued a final judgement for online retailer Newegg, twenty months after trial, vacating a $2.3 million jury award for TQP. TQP, a patent assertion entity commonly known as a “patent troll,” collected $45 million in settlements for the patent in question before Newegg’s trial.


By Greg Tang

TSA Offends Travelers with Body Scanners, Fails to be Accountable

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) commented on the TSA’s use of body scanners in airports across the country, which has raised serious public concerns over the indignity and invasiveness of the body scanners and pat-down searches. The EFF expressed skepticism over the effectiveness of the body scanners in detecting terrorist attacks like the Christmas Day Bomb of 2009, citing various sources, including a TSA document, that have shown materials such as liquid, powder, and thin plastic — as well as passenger clothing — to be undetectable by the scanners. The EFF also reported on the Government Accountability Office’s criticisms of the TSA. The TSA has routinely refused to release test results to the public or perform cost-benefit analyses before adopting new technologies, despite estimated direct costs of $2.4 billion over a 7-year life cycle for the body scanners.

FCC Commissioner Casts Doubt Over Net Neutrality Rules

Ars Technica reported on comments that FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell made regarding the likelihood of FCC-issued net neutrality rules in a talk to the Federalist Society last Monday. The Commissioner expressed uncertainty regarding the substance and timing of any potential rules. The comments came just one week after FCC Chair Julius Genachowski spoke at the Web 2.0 summit in San Francisco, promising to make the rules happen and lambasting Google and Verizon for proposing their own version of open Internet rules back in August. McDowell cautioned against “taking a giant leap into a potentially dark and dangerous regulatory abyss,” and instead advocated cooperation with the FTC, trade associations, consumer groups, and Internet engineers to use existing consumer protection and antitrust laws to punish bad actors and help consumers — a proposal similar to the self-regulatory approach suggested by Comcast last week.

Novell Acquired by Attachmate; IP Goes to Microsoft

Enterprise Linux provider Novell announced last Monday that it would merge with Attachmate, with some intellectual property assets going to a consortium organized by Microsoft. InfoWorld reported on speculations that Microsoft would acquire core Unix IP from the deal, but ComputerWorld confirmed that Attachmate retains control over Novell’s copyrights for the Unix operating system. Since SCO Group launched its attack on Linux in 2003, claiming ownership of Unix intellectual property and copyright infringement by the open-source Linux operating system, Novell has defended the Linux community by defeating SCO in court and declining to pursue copyright action against Linux users. However, Novell has been subjected to criticism from the open-source community in 2006 for reaching a patent agreement with Microsoft over claims that Linux infringed upon Microsoft’s patents.

Jury Awards $1.3 billion in Copyright Damages from SAP to Oracle

Ars Technica reported on the record $1.3 billion that German software maker SAP was ordered to pay rival Oracle in their copyright infringement lawsuit in the Northern District of California. Oracle sued SAP in March 2007 for allegedly using customers’ login credentials to download software and technical support materials from Oracle’s servers. Despite admitting to the inappropriate downloads, SAP had hoped for damages of $41 million from the jury. Several jurors have stated that the award was determined by focusing on how much SAP would have paid if it simply licensed the rights from Oracle, a common method for determining losses in piracy cases.

US Government Cracks Down on Piracy by Seizing Over 70 Domain Names

The New York Times reported that the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division seized over 70 websites suspected to be involved in file-sharing and counterfeiting goods early Friday morning. The popular file-sharing blog TorrentFreak explained that the websites were shut down by ordering ICANN, the non-profit corporation responsible for mapping human-understandable domain names into numeric IP addresses, to redirect traffic from the seized domains to ICE’s takedown notice. OSNews raised concerns that the method used by the ICE could escalate to censorship of websites outside the US (such as whistleblower site WikiLeaks), as ICANN operates the root domain name servers for the entire Internet. The domain name seizures resemble actions authorized under the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, which just passed the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.

Posted On Nov - 28 - 2010 Comments Off READ FULL POST

New York Appellate Court Rejects Demand for Facebook Records
By Irina Oberman – Edited by Ian C. Wildgoose Brown

McCann v. Harleysville Ins. Co. of N.Y., No. 10-00612, 1179 (N.Y.A.D. 4 Dept. Nov. 12, 2010)
Slip Opinion

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York affirmed the Supreme Court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel disclosure of photographs on Facebook and defendant’s motion for authorizedaccess to plaintiff’s Facebook account. The Supreme Court had ruled that defendant’s first request was “overly broad,” and that the amended request had failed to establish a factual predicate that the Facebook account was relevant. The Appellate Division agreed with the Supreme Court, noting that defendant was simply engaging in a “fishing expedition” to find relevant evidence. The Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court’s order, however, allowing defendant to file future discovery requests relating to plaintiff’s Facebook account.

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog provides an overview of the case and contrasts it with the Romano v. Steelcase ruling in September. Internet Cases blog warns that although the ruling is significant, it merely addresses overly-broad discovery requests and should not be construed as a decision to protect private personal information per se. (more…)

Posted On Nov - 28 - 2010 Comments Off READ FULL POST

USPTO Patent Denial Lawsuits Subject to FRE and FRCP
By Harry Zhou – Edited by Ian C. Wildgoose Brown

Hyatt v. Kappos, No. 07-1066 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 8, 2010) (en banc)
Slip Opinion

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, vacated and remanded the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which had ruled that a patent applicant is barred from introducing new facts into evidence in a civil action against the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) brought under 35 U.S.C. § 145. The district court had ruled that the new facts should have been produced to the USPTO in the original application.

The Federal Circuit reversed its precedent, holding that a district court does not review a decision of the USPTO under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”)’s deferential court/agency standard on issues where the applicant offers new facts in evidence. The only limitations on the admissibility of new evidence in a § 145 civil action are those “contained in the Federal Rules of Evidence and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” The court remanded the case for further proceedings.

271 Patent Blog offers a brief summary of the decision. Patently-O features an analysis of the decision’s likely impacts. IPWatchdog provides a survey of the case law and statutory background relevant to the decision. (more…)

Posted On Nov - 23 - 2010 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Lauren Henry

Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Anti-Piracy Bill

Ars Technica and CNET report that the Senate Judiciary Committee has unanimously approved a bill that would blacklist websites deemed to be “pirate websites” from the Domain Name System, ban credit card companies from processing US payments to such sites, and forbid online ad networks from working with the sites. The bill — known as the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, or COICA — received the strong support of content industry leaders, who perceive it as protecting their intellectual property, and the vociferous opposition of free speech advocates. Peter Eckersley at EFF’s Deeplinks blog argues that COICA fails to monetize content distribution for intellectual property holders, increases data traffic costs, and unconstitutionally restricts freedom of speech.

Limewire: Pirate Edition Provokes Search for Its Creator

Ars Technica reports that the RIAA and LimeWire are attempting to identify the creator of LimeWire: Pirate Edition. Days after a federal judge ordered LimeWire to shut down all software and cease distribution, LimeWire: Pirate Edition appeared. The new version of the program is functionally equivalent to LimeWire, as it is based on LimeWire’s open-source code. RIAA and LimeWire are conducting independent investigations to find the culprit.

Democrats Propose Cybersecurity Bill to Empower DHS to Punish Tech Firms

CNET reports that Democrats have proposed legislation that would give the Department of Homeland Security the power to fine technology companies $100,000 a day for failure to comply with the agency’s directives. The bill, known as the Homeland Security Cyber and Physical Infrastructure Protection Act, would give the DHS broad authority to enforce cybersecurity measures upon any “system or asset” deemed to be a “component of the national information infrastructure.” Critics argue that DHS lacks the institutional competency to effectively administer such powers, and that private companies need no additional incentives to enact security measures.

Posted On Nov - 23 - 2010 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Federal Circuit rules that prosecution laches requires evidence of prejudice
By Jonathan Allred – Edited by Elizabeth Akerman

Cancer Research Technology Ltd. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., No. 2010-1204 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2010)
Slip Opinion

The Federal Circuit overturned the District Court of Delaware, which had ruled that the plaintiff’s patent was unenforceable for prosecution laches, and, in the alternative, invalid for inequitable conduct.

Prosecution laches is an equitable defense to infringement when the plaintiff has delayed the prosecution of a patent application unreasonably. In this case, the Federal Circuit held that prosecution laches requires a finding of prejudice – evidence that the accused infringer “invested in, worked on, or used the claimed technology during the period of delay” – in addition to an unreasonable delay in prosecution.

As the opinion notes, the usefulness of the doctrine will be limited now that patent terms are measured from the effective filing date and not the date of refilling.

The Federal Circuit also overturned the Delaware court’s ruling on inequitable conduct.

Patently-O offers a synopsis and disagrees with the dissent. Inventive Step summarizes the opinion. The Patent Prospector provides the text of the opinion with commentary sympathetic with the dissent interjected throughout. (more…)

Posted On Nov - 17 - 2010 Comments Off READ FULL POST
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • GooglePlay

Patenting Bioprintin

By Jasper L. Tran – Edited by Henry Thomas “Patenting tends to ...


More than a White Ra

By Allison E. Butler – Edited by Travis West I. Introduction On ...

Prescription Medication Spilling From an Open Medicine Bottle

Legal and Policy Asp

By Ariella Michal Medows – Edited by Kenneth Winterbottom The United ...

Photo By: Razor512 - CC BY 2.0

Net Neutrality Devel

By Angela Daly – Edited by Katherine Zimmerman 1.      Introduction This contribution will ...


Newegg Wins Patent T

By Kasey Wang – Edited by Yunnan Jiang and Travis ...