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

Federal Circuit Flash Digest

By Kayla Haran – Edited by Ken Winterbottom

Court Finds Negative Claim Limitation Meets Written Description Requirements

International Trade Commission’s Expansion of its Jurisdiction to Include Electronic Transmissions of Digital Data Ruled Improper

Court Holds That Patent Trial and Appeal Board Did Not Deny Procedural Rights in Review



Federal Circuit Flash Digest

By Patrick Gallagher – Edited by Ken Winterbottom

TOR Project Head Alleges FBI Paid Carnegie Mellon for Hack in Connection with Silk Road 2.0 Investigation

DOJ Decides Not to Support FCC in Efforts to Preempt States Laws Limiting Municipal Broadband Projects

D.C. Court of Appeals Permits Continuation of Bulk Domestic Phone Data Collection



Senate passes Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act

By Frederick Ding — Edited by Yunnan Jiang

On October 27, 2015, the Senate passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), which enables companies to share cyber threat indicators with each other and the federal government, and immunizes them from liability for sharing under the act. Tech companies and journalists have vocally expressed opposition to the act, which may enable companies to share users’ personal information.



Senators push bill protecting interstate trade secrets amidst concerns over trolling

By Bhargav Srinivasan – Edited by Olga Slobodyanyuk

The Senate Judiciary Committee is deliberating a bill to provide US companies with extra legal protections for trade secrets for products or services used in interstate commerce. However, some legal scholars believe the bill creates strong potential for companies to engage in “trade secret trolling” by falsely accusing rivals of stealing trade secrets in order to stall their business. The ensuing debate now weighs the intent of the bill with the potential for legal bullying.



Federal Circuit Flash Digest

By Keke Wu – Edited by Yunnan Jiang

Federal Circuit Rejects-in-part the District Court’s Claim Construction

No Jurisdiction to Claim Reputational Harm after Settlement

Federal Circuit Affirms-in-part PTAB in Belden vs. Berk-Tek


By Sarah O’Loughlin – Edited by Ken Winterbottom

Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, In re Google Inc. Gmail Litigation, Case No. 13-MD-02430-LHK (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2014)
Order hosted by InsidePrivacy

Photo By: rovllsCC BY 2.0

Google, Inc. scored a victory last week when a U.S. judge denied class certification to Gmail users attempting to sue the company for violating the privacy rights of hundreds of millions of email users. On March 18, 2014, District Judge Lucy Koh issued an opinion, finding that the issue of consent is too fundamental to the case and too different among the parties seeking class action status together.

The lawsuit alleges that Google’s data-mining practices used in its Gmail electronic-messaging service violate federal and state wiretap and privacy laws. Plaintiffs argue that Google has been improperly intercepting, reading, and mining the content of e-mails for targeted advertising in an attempt to build user profiles. The suit covers several different groups, including people who send e-mails to Gmail users as well as non-Gmail accounts users who pay to use the Google Apps service. Bloomberg and Ars Technica provide further commentary on the allegations, and HuffingtonPost provides further context to the student privacy aspect of the lawsuit. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 27 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Travis West

Icon-newsNSA responds to ABA demand for clarification regarding surveillance of privileged communications

After revelations that intelligence agencies may be spying on privileged communications between lawyers and their clients, the American Bar Association (“ABA”) wrote a letter to the National Security Agency (“NSA”) demanding that the agency clarify its policies regarding the collection of potentially confidential information. The ABA expressed concern that the NSA may be infringing on “the bedrock legal principle” of attorney-client privilege. The NSA responded that it “has afforded, and will continue to afford, appropriate protection to privileged attorney-client communications,” pointing, as an example, to its Section 702 Minimization Procedures for collecting data in a criminal proceeding under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. 50 U.S.C. § 1881a.

In response, ABA President James Silkenat voiced the organization’s appreciation for “the NSA’s expression of respect for the attorney-client privilege” and indicated that the ABA “looks forward to continuing a constructive dialogue” with the agency. At the same time, as reported by Lawfare Blog, the ABA now offers a course for lawyers on how to prevent spying on their communications – both “abroad and at home.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) expressed disappointment with the NSA’s lack of clarity in its response to the ABA and with the ABA’s quiet acceptance of that response. With respect to government surveillance of privileged communications, the EFF predicts that the “only real dialogue now can be in courtrooms and in Congress.”

United States to turn over control of Domain Name System

In a surprising move, the United States National Telecommunications and Information Administration (“NTIA”) announced that it would be turning over control of the root Domain Name System (“DNS”) to international control in 2015. Currently, the DNS is run by the International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”), who received the contract to run the system from the NTIA, a subsidiary of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The DNS comprises technology that translates a human-readable website name, such as “www.google.com” to a device-readable IP address, like The controller of the DNS possesses great power, since it could remove a domain name and thus make it impossible for people to find the associated website. While the United States has not exercised that power, many countries have feared the possibility.

The United States has planned to relinquish control of the root DNS to the international community since the 1990s, originally hoping for the transition to take place in 2000. The recent announcement comes shortly before the April 2014 ICANN meeting, at which Brazil was expected to propose its own DNS, which would have lead to a fracturing of the Internet. The United States’ relinquishing control of the DNS should scuttle those efforts. However, the United States did not announce what form of governance will now oversee the DNS, raising questions about which companies or international organizations have the technical expertise required to administer the the system.

Turkey bans Twitter with limited success

Within hours of Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s promise to “wipe out” Twitter, Turkey’s courts ordered Twitter blocked nationwide. The court order arrived shortly after recordings allegedly showing corruption in Erdogan’s inner circle appeared on social media. The ban – accomplished by a change in the Domain Name Service (“DNS”) hosted by Turkish network providers – initially proved ineffective. Almost 3 million tweets were posted in Turkey in the first 24 hours following the ban, and Twitter itself posted workarounds to the DNS ban. However, the Turkish government has now extended the block to the IP addresses of Twitter in Turkey, which has forced users to install Tor or a VPN client to get around the ban.

Posted On Mar - 26 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Jenny Choi – Edited by Ashish Bakshi

Vederi, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 2013-1057 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 14, 2014)
Slip Opinion

Photo By: Kathy McGrawCC BY 2.0

On March 14, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and vacated the United States District Court for the Central District of California’s decision entering summary judgment in favor of Google, Inc. The district court had held that Google’s “Street View” product did not infringe asserted patents of Vederi, LLC. because its images are a curved representation of the world and thus not elevation views. The Federal Circuit held that the district court erred in narrowly interpreting “substantially elevation,” based on extrinsic evidence, to cover only flat images. Vederi, slip op. at 9. After analyzing intrinsic evidence, the Federal Circuit held that “substantially elevation” covered both flat and spherical images. Id. at 10. Consequently, the Federal Circuit vacated the summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings. Id. at 14. The Federal Circuit noted that it preferred claim construction based on intrinsic evidence and interpretation that “gives meaning to all the terms of the claim.” Id. at 10.

Bloomberg and Wiley Rein, LLP provide a short summary of the case. PatentlyO also provides an overview of the case and cites Vederi as an example of the Federal Circuit’s continuing denial of any direct patent-related input from Judge Kozniski, who is Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and who sat by designation in deciding on summary judgment in Vederi at the district court. The Wake Forest Journal of Business & Intellectual Property Law provides background on the case’s initial filing in 2010. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 25 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Zoe Bedell – Edited by Gea Kang

Photo By: satanoidCC BY 2.0

On March 13, 2014, the San Antonio City Council pre-approved a long-term lease that would allow Google to begin construction to bring Google Fiber to the city. While Google has not yet chosen San Antonio as a destination for its fiber network, the city’s leaders hope that the lease will encourage Google to do so. Wired discusses the city’s move.

Google’s high-speed Internet service is currently available in Kansas City, Missouri, and Provo, Utah. Google has also announced plans to expand to Austin, Texas, and will be considering thirty-four additional cities in nine different metropolitan areas for further expansion. The company has established selection criteria that will speed up the review process and ensure that construction can proceed quickly. For instance, Google asks interested cities to provide details on existing infrastructure and to review local permitting processes. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 25 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST

By Mark Verstraete — Edited by Sarah O’Loughlin

Greene v. MtGox Inc., No. 1:14-cv-1437 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 27, 2014)
Complaint hosted by Scribd

Joyce . MtGox Inc. (Mar. 14, 2014), No. cv-14-500253-00CP (Can. Ont. Sup. Ct. J.)
Complaint hosted by Ars Technica

Photo By: fdecomiteCC BY 2.0

Putative class action suits have been filed against Mt. Gox—the now defunct online bitcoin exchange—in both the United States and Canada. In Febrauary 2014, Mt. Gox halted withdrawals after being hit with a sustained distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack. Several days later, it filed for bankruptcy when 850,000 bitcoins were stolen.

The U.S. suit, Greene v. MtGox Inc., No. 1:14-cv-1437 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 27, 2014), proposes two classes of Plaintiffs:

(1) “Payment Class: All persons in the United States who paid a fee to Mt. Gox to buy, sell, or otherwise trade bitcoins.”

(2) “Frozen Currency Class: All persons in the United States who had bitcoins or Fiat Currency stored with Mt. Gox on February 7, 2014.”

Complaint, Greene, at 10. The two proposed classes allege several causes of action against Mt. Gox, including consumer fraud, negligence, and conversion. In their negligence claim against Mt. Gox, the plaintiffs allege that Mt. Gox breached its “duty to employ procedures to detect and prevent the improper access and misuse of Plaintiff’s and the Classes’ bitcoins,” and that this breach caused the “Plaintiff and the Payment Class [to] suffer economic injury and other damages.” Id. at 19.

Ars Technica provides commentary on the complaint. Reuters also discusses Mt. Gox’s decision to file for bankruptcy in the wake of this complaint. (more…)

Posted On Mar - 24 - 2014 Comments Off READ FULL POST
  • RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • GooglePlay
Fed. Cir. Flash Digest

Federal Circuit Flas

By Kayla Haran – Edited by Ken Winterbottom Court Finds Negative ...

Fed. Cir. Flash Digest

Federal Circuit Flas

By Patrick Gallagher – Edited by Ken Winterbottom TOR Project Head ...


Senate passes Cybers

Senate passes Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act By Frederick Ding — Edited by ...

Senate Judiciary Committee

Senators push bill p

By Bhargav Srinivasan – Edited by Olga Slobodyanyuk In October, Senators ...


Federal Circuit Flas

Federal Circuit Flash Digest By Keke Wu – Edited by Yunnan ...