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 Viviana Ruiz

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...

Maracich v. Spears
By Natalie Kim – Edited by Mary Grinman

Photo By: . .CC BY 2.0

Maracich v. Spears, No. 12-25, 570 U.S. ___ (June 17, 2013)
Slip Opinion

On Monday, the Supreme Court held that the “litigation exception” of the Driver Privacy Protection Act (“DPPA”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 2721–2725, did not apply to attorney solicitation of clients, vacating a decision of the 4th Circuit. On remand, the lower court must determine whether Spears’ communications were sent with “the predominant purpose of solicitation.” Maracich, slip op. at 29.

Overlawyered summarizes the holding, speculating which points may be more relevant on remand. Cato expresses surprise at how every Justice switched sides since another significant privacy case two weeks ago, Maryland v. King, No. 12-207, 569 U.S. ___ (June 3, 2013) (holding that post-arrest cheek swabs were legitimate police booking procedures under the Fourth Amendment). NYTimes mentions that this could expose routine attorney activity to “huge” civil and criminal liability.

(more…)

Posted On Jun - 23 - 2013 1 Comment READ FULL POST

By Kathleen McGuinness

Icon-newsGoogle News Becomes Opt-In in Germany

Following Germany’s recent broadening of copyright protection for news “snippets,” Google News changed their user policy for publishers in Germany, requiring publishers to opt in to Google News participation using a new confirmation system. Forbes provides a translation of the new policy. Tools like robots.txt, which prevent Google from indexing a page, will still be recognized. In all other countries, Google News remains opt-out; publishers who do not want excerpts of their work reprinted in search results must use tools like robot.txt or inform Google that they do not want their pages to be indexed, both of which prevent results from appearing in Google searches. TechCrunch gives an explanation of the history of the new law and its implications.

Federal Circuit Rules that Software Patent Is Not an “Abstract Idea”

On Friday, the Federal Circuit in Ultramercial v. Hulu, No. 2010-1544 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2013), found to be valid a patent protecting a method of distributing copyrighted content online without user payments, in exchange for the user viewing an advertisement which would pay for the copyrighted content. The court focused on the pro-protection history of the most recent changes to the Patent Act, the fact that the patent did not cover every application of the abstract idea, and on Supreme Court precedent indicating that a patent tying an abstract idea to a specific method for doing something with a computer is not too abstract to merit protection. IP Spotlight describes the holding and its implications in more detail.

Tokyo Court Rules for Apple, Against Samsung in Bounce-Back Patent Dispute

On Friday, a Tokyo court ruled that Samsung had infringed Apple’s controversial “bounce-back” patent on certain earlier models of Samsung smartphones. The status of Apple’s U.S. patent on the bounce-back user interface element remains in contention; the PTO ruled that the patent was invalid earlier this year, but recently decided that some elements of the interface were patentable. Reuters has a short summary. Apple and Samsung have gone back and forth in their Tokyo patent disputes; last August, Apple lost a suit against Samsung over music and video synchronization on smartphones. Bloomberg describes the business history and implications of the decision.

Posted On Jun - 22 - 2013 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Organic Seed Growers and Trade Ass’n v. Monsanto Co.
By Kathleen McGuinness – Edited by Jennifer Wong

Photo By: the yes manCC BY 2.0

Organic Seed Growers and Trade Ass’n v. Monsanto Co., 2012-1298, (Fed. Cir. Jun. 10, 2013).
Slip Opinion

On June 10, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an action seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity with respect to three biotechnology patents owned by Monsanto, affirming the lower court’s holding that there was no justiciable case or controversy and dismissing for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that Monsanto’s assurances that it would not take legal action in cases of inadvertent contamination by their proprietary transgenic seeds constituted a legally binding disclaimer of intent to sue. Since the plaintiffs had taken no steps to remove themselves from the protection of this disclaimer, any controversy was moot.

Reuters provides a summary of the case. Bloomberg discusses the factual background in more detail. Patently-O briefly explains the legal holding. (more…)

Posted On Jun - 20 - 2013 Comments Off READ FULL POST

Kelly-Brown v. Winfrey
By Alex Shank – Edited by Samantha Rothberg

Photo By: nayrb7CC BY 2.0

Kelly-Brown v. Winfrey, No. 12-1207 (2nd Cir. May 31, 2013)
Slip opinion

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the District Court for the Southern District of New York’s (S.D.N.Y.) dismissal of trademark infringement claims against Oprah Winfrey, rejecting her fair use defense. Kelly-Brown alleged that Winfrey had used her trademarked phrase “Own Your Power” “as a mark” on the cover of O, The Oprah Magazine, its website, and at a magazine event.

Bloomberg summarizes the case and provides comments from Harpo, Inc. and Hearst Corp., two of Winfrey’s media enterprises. Reuters reports that Kelly-Brown was “ecstatic” about the result. JDSupra praised the court’s recognition of Kelly-Brown’s trademark as a “concept,” while Rebecca Tushnet critiqued the Second Circuit’s further confusing the meaning of “descriptive use.” (more…)

Posted On Jun - 18 - 2013 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Samantha Rothberg

Icon-newsChinese National Sentenced to 12 Years in U.S. Prison for Selling Pirated Software

Chinese citizen Xiang Li was sentenced to 12 years in a U.S. federal prison for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and criminal copyright infringement, Bloomberg reports. Li operated a website, “Crack 99,” which sold more than $100 million worth of pirated software between 2008 and 2011. He was arrested in Saipan, a U.S. territory, after traveling there to sell software to undercover federal agents. According to prosecutors, Li is the first Chinese national to be “apprehended and prosecuted in the U.S. for cybercrimes he engaged in entirely from China.”

Songwriters’ Rights Group BMI Sues Pandora Over Fee Dispute

Broadcast Music Inc. (“BMI”), an organization that collects royalties on behalf of music publishers and songwriters when their works are played in public, filed suit in federal court against Pandora, the Internet radio service, the Wall Street Journal reports. Earlier this week, Pandora purchased a small radio station in South Dakota and argued that this move entitles it to pay BMI the reduced royalty fees that traditional radio broadcasters pay. BMI decried Pandora’s move as a “brazen effort to artificially drive down its license fees.” The organization sued for a judicial declaration of the rates that Pandora must pay when it plays an artist’s song.

Google Argues Wi-FI is “Radio Signal” in Street View Case

Google urged the Ninth Circuit to overrule a judge’s 2011 finding that its Street View program had violated the federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510–2522, by collecting private data over unencrypted wi-fi signals, Bloomberg reports. Google argues that transmissions over an open wi-fi signal are equivalent to public radio transmissions, and the interception of a radio transmission or any “form of electronic communication readily accessible to the general public” is not illegal under the Wiretap Act. Attorney Elizabeth Cabraser, who represents the consumers who won the initial ruling, argued that the Wiretap Act exception was intended to protect ham radios used for communicating over long distances, and not wi-fi networks, which are broadcast over very short distances. She urged the court to reject Google’s “attempt to create a loophole to serve its own purposes.”

New York Aims to Crack Down on 3D Gun Printing

A New York city councilman introduced legislation on Wednesday that would make it illegal for anyone other than a licensed gunsmith to manufacture guns using a 3D printer, reports CNET. The bill would require legal manufacturers to register the guns with police within 72 hours of creation. The New York State Legislature and U.S. Congress have both recently introduced similar legislation, and a California state senator has announced plans to do the same. The surge in legislation stems from the worry that untraceable, undetectable plastic guns could be anonymously printed by anyone with a 3D printer and the necessary software. Last month, that vision took a step closer to reality when the non-profit organization Defense Distributed announced that it had created the world’s first 3D-printed handgun, the “Liberator.”

Posted On Jun - 16 - 2013 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 Viviana Ruiz 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. ...