A student-run resource for reliable reports on the latest law and technology news
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Federal Circuit Flash Digest: News in Brief

By Steven Wilfong

Multimedia car system patents ruled as unenforceable based on inequitable conduct

ITC’s ruling that uPI violated Consent Order affirmed

Court rules that VeriFone devices did not infringe on payment terminal software patents

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Flash Digest: News in Brief

By Marcela Martinez

Converse attempts to protect iconic Chuck Taylor All Star design

French Court rules that shoe design copyright was not infringed

Oklahoma Court rules that Facebook notifications do not satisfy notice requirement

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Silk Road Founder Loses Argument That the FBI Illegally Hacked Servers to Find Evidence against Him

By Travis West  — Edited by Mengyi Wang

The alleged Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht was denied the motion to suppress evidence in his case. Ulbricht argued that the FBI illegally hacked the Silk Road servers to search for evidence to use in search warrants for the server. The judge denied the motion because Ulbricht failed to establish he had any privacy interest in the server.

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Trademark Infringement or First Amendment Right of Freedom of Speech?

By Yunnan Jiang – Edited by Paulius Jurcys

On October 11, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) and the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, Inc. (“ACLU”) filed a joint brief in the U.S. Court Of Appeals, urging  that “trademark laws should not be used to impinge the First Amendment rights of critics and commentators”. The brief argues that the use of the names of organizations to comment, critique, and parody, is constitutionally protected by the speaker’s First Amendment right of freedom of expression.

Read More...

http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/joltimg.png

Twitter goes to court over government restrictions limiting reporting on surveillance requests

By Jens Frankenreiter – Edited by Michael Shammas

Twitter on Oct. 7 sued the government, asking a federal district court to rule that it was allowed to reveal the numbers of surveillance requests it receives in greater detail. Twitter opposes complying with the rules agreed upon by the government and other tech companies in a settlement earlier this year, and argues that the rules violated its rights under the First Amendment.

Read More...

By Zoe Bedell – Edited by Corey Omer

Commonwealth v. Shabazz Augustine, SJC-11482 (Sup. Jud. Ct. Suffolk Feb. 18, 2014).
Slip opinion hosted by Universal Hub

Photo By: Jeff RuaneCC BY 2.0

On February 18, 2014, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) agreed with a Superior Court ruling that the Commonwealth must seek a warrant in most cases before obtaining cell phone records that track an individual’s location. The SJC nevertheless vacated the lower court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress the records and remanded the case for a hearing on whether the Commonwealth had met the higher ‘probable cause’ standard required for the issuance of a warrant. Slip op. at 1–2, 13.

In a 5-2 decision, the SJC held that the Commonwealth obtaining this tracking information — called historical cell site location information (“CSLI”) — from a cellular service provider constitutes a search within the meaning of art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and therefore requires a search warrant supported by probable cause. The Commonwealth had previously obtained such information by applying for an order under 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) of the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”), which requires only proof of reasonable suspicion. So, this case joins an earlier SJC decision, Commonwealth v. Rousseau, 465 Mass. 372 (2013), opinion hosted by Justia.com, in increasing privacy protections under the Massachusetts Constitution. Jacob Gershman of the Wall Street Journal summarizes the opinion. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 10 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Gea Kang

Icon-newsFacebook looks to provide Internet access viadrones

In the wake of last month’s WhatsApp acquisition, Facebook may be adding Titan Aerospace to its arsenal for another $60 million.  Titan, a privately held company based in New Mexico, produces unmanned “atmospheric satellites.”  These satellites are solar-powered and can stay airborne for five years without refueling.  Titan unveiled the prototypes last year.

Facebook’s interest in this area stems from its work with Internet.org, which aims to provide Internet connectivity to those who currently lack access around the world.  Facebook is reportedly looking at 11,000 Titan satellites to help bridge this digital divide.  Google has been working toward the same goal with its balloon-powered wireless network, Project Loon.

Although the Titan satellites are ultimately slated to fly above the Federal Aviation Administration’s jurisdiction, regulatory constraints on the climb up to that altitude must still be addressed. TechCrunch first released news of the potential acquisition on Monday.

Michael Jordan emerges victorious in commercial speech case

Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit sided with Michael Jordan in a dispute that could have important implications for commercial speech allowances under the First Amendment.  Michael Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. and SuperValu Inc., No.12-1992 (7th Cir. Feb. 19, 2014).  In its opinion reversing and remanding the case, the court held that grocery chain Jewel Food Stores, Inc.’s unendorsed use of Jordan’s trademark in an advertisement constituted commercial speech.  A federal district court had previously accepted Jewel’s argument that the advertisement was not commercial in nature and was thereby protected by the First Amendment.

The case centers on a one-page advertisement published in an October 2009 commemorative issue of Sports Illustrated. The advertisement congratulated Jordan for his induction into the Basketball Hall of Fame and included Jewel’s logo and motto along with Jordan’s name, number, and shoes. However, the ad did not name any specific Jewel products or depict Jordan himself.  Jordan sued, emphasizing the alleged misappropriation of his identity.  The Seventh Circuit agreed with Jordan, finding that “Jewel’s ad had an unmistakable commercial function: enhancing the Jewel-Osco brand in the minds of consumers.” Jordan, slip op. at 16.

ESPN provides details of the case and its precedential implications.

Apple wins patent for transparent wraparound phone screen

Apple won 36 patent grants last Tuesday. Of these, U.S. Patent No. 8,665,236 has generated particular interest. The patent, originally filed in September 2011, discloses a transparent wraparound screen made of flexible glass—essentially, a reversible phone with no permanent front or back. Multiple cameras and facial recognition would facilitate the user interface, and the phone would be completely touchscreen. Despite the suggestion that a double-sided screen would accommodate more icons for users’ convenience, some commentators are concerned that consumers will not welcome the lack of physical buttons, such as for volume control. Patently Apple provides further details and graphics.

Posted On Mar - 9 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Ken Winterbottom

Theft drives former Bitcoin giant Mt. Gox into bankruptcy

Icon-newsMt. Gox, a Bitcoin exchange based in Japan, filed for bankruptcy last week after the theft of 850,000 of its Bitcoins. The company, which started as an online Magic: The Gathering marketplace, once oversaw 70% of all Bitcoin trades, though its prominence had fallen significantly even before the theft.

Despite CEO Mark Karpeles offering a glimmer of hope for victimized customers in a Tokyo press conference, investors say that the lost Bitcoins, worth about $473 million and representing about 7% of the estimated global Bitcoin total, likely cannot be recovered. A class action lawsuit has already been filed against Mt. Gox in Illinois, alleging consumer fraud and negligence.

Bitcoin, the first of a growing number of unregulated digital cryptocurrencies, was originally lauded as a currency immune to theft, corruption, and counterfeiting. However, faith in the currency has been shaken by a series of setbacks, from the FBI shutdown of the Silk Road, an online Bitcoin-only black market, to reports of Bitcoin counterfeiting. Cryptocurrency supporters view events like these, including the Mt. Gox bankruptcy, as illustrating the importance of stronger security measures going forward, but remain confident in Bitcoin and in the cryptocurrency movement.

Lessig v. Liberation Music Settlement

Harvard Law School Professor Lawrence Lessig claimed a victory last week in his ongoing fight for fair use in copyright practices. Last summer, Professor Lessig used a snippet from the song “Lisztomania” by the French band Phoenix in a lecture video that he uploaded online. While the band itself came out strongly in support of Professor Lessig’s use of the song, Liberation Music, the Australian music label that owns the rights to “Lisztomania,” had the video forcibly removed. Not one to be bullied into submission, Professor Lessig decided to fight back. In collaboration with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”), a digital civil rights group, he successfully challenged the takedown in federal court, arguing that he was well within his rights to use Phoenix’s music under fair use policies. Complaint, Lessig v. Liberation Music Pty Ltd, No. 13-cv-12028 (D. Mass. Aug. 22, 2013) hosted by EFF.

Although the full terms of the settlement agreement remain confidential, Liberation Music admitted that the use of the song was permissible under both U.S. and Australian law, and it agreed to update its copyright policies to respect fair use. The music label will also pay Professor Lessig an undisclosed amount of money, which will go toward supporting the work of the EFF. Professor Lessig, a co-founder of the Creative Commons, is a longtime supporter of open access software, the public domain, and reduced restrictions on copyright and trademark use. His book Republic, Lost, is available for free online. In a statement about the settlement, Professor Lessig said:

“Too often copyright is used as an excuse to silence legitimate speech. . . . Hopefully, this lawsuit will send a message to copyright owners to adopt fair takedown practices – or face the consequences.”

“Google Tax” scrapped in Italy

In December of last year, the Italian Parliament passed a law which would impose a de facto tax on web advertisements. The law arose in response to a widespread practice among web giants that run on advertising revenue – including Google, Yahoo, and Amazon – of transferring corporate taxable earnings to foreign havens, such as Ireland, Luxembourg, and Bermuda, allegedly costing Europe and the U.S. over $100 billion annually. The Parliament postponed enacting the law until July 2014.

Now, the government of new Italian prime minister Matteo Renzi, sworn in last weekend, has decided to cancel the so-called “Google Tax,” which many predicted would be found to violate European Union laws.

The idea of a “Google Tax” is not new: Israel has been considering a similar law for some time. The proposed Israeli law would apply specifically to search engines and would assess a straightforward 7% royalty. The Italian law, by contrast, required web giants to use Italian companies as middlemen in setting up advertisements. Meanwhile, Germany passed a law last year that would permit publishers to charge search engines royalties for using their news snippets.

Posted On Mar - 3 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Travis West – Edited by Husam El-Qoulaq

Photo By: Jeremy KeithCC BY 2.0

A document leaked by Edward Snowden shows that the Australian Signals Directorate (“ASD”) spied on communications between the Indonesian government and a US law firm that the foreign government had retained for assistance in trade negotiations. When the ASD sought advice from the National Security Agency (“NSA”) about continuing to report on the Indonesian communications, the NSA’s Office of the General Counsel “provided clear guidance,” possibly regarding the reporting of “information covered by attorney-client privilege.” The document states that the ASD was able to continue covering the talks between the Indonesian government and its US counsel and that it had provided “highly useful intelligence for interested US customers.”

The New York Times broke the story and posted an excerpt of the leaked document. The Chicago Tribune reports a response from Mayer Brown, the law firm advising Indonesia at the time of the document’s publication in an NSA monthly bulletin. Ars Technica and the ABA Journal provide additional commentary. The Guardian further reports on the ASD’s surveillance of Indonesia, as well as the NSA’s involvement in helping the ASD to crack Indonesian encryption.  Lawfare Blog views the document as a sign of the tight cooperation between the NSA and ASD and criticizes the New York Times for overselling the story. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 3 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Geng Chen – Edited by Ashish Bakshi

Elcommerce.com, Inc. v. SAP AG , No. 2011-1369 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 24, 2014)
Slip opinion

Photo By: Brian TurnerCC BY 2.0

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s grant of summary judgment in a patent infringement suit filed by elcommerce against SAP AG and SAP America, Inc. (“SAP”). Elcommerce.com, slip op. at 1–3. The district court held that the method claims in elcommerce’s U.S. Patent No. 6,947,903 (“the ‘903 patent”) were not infringed and that the system claims were invalid for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112. Id. at 3. The Federal Circuit affirmed the noninfringement holding but vacated the invalidity holding, id., stating that SAP had failed to meet its evidentiary burden because its indefiniteness argument was not supported by the testimony of “technical experts who meet the Daubert criteria,” id. at 29.

Bloomberg provides an overview of the case. PatentlyO features a thorough analysis of the decision.

(more…)

Posted On Mar - 2 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • GooglePlay
Icon-news

Federal Circuit Flas

By Steven Wilfong Multimedia car system patents ruled as unenforceable based ...

Icon-news

Flash Digest: News i

By Marcela Martinez Converse attempts to protect iconic Chuck Taylor All ...

silkroad_fbi_110813

Silk Road Founder Lo

By Travis West — Edited by Mengyi Wang Order, United States ...

free-speech

Trademark Infringeme

By Yunnan Jiang – Edited by Paulius Jurcys Brief for the ...

Twitter.png?t=20130219104123

Twitter goes to cour

By Jens Frankenreiter – Edited by Michael Shammas Twitter, Inc. vs. ...