This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Copyright holders see pirate site blocking as an effective and proportional anti-piracy measure. Over the years, courts and lawmakers in dozens of countries have agreed, resulting in a patchwork of blocking regimes around the globe. Initially, these efforts focused on residential ISPs as the key intermediaries. While these companies were not blamed directly, they were the go-to parties to implement blocking.
Reading Time: 4 minutes Court looks to the parties behavior while buying a home to find an enforceable agreement of purchase and sale. A recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision, VanderMolen Homes Inc. v. Mani, 2025 ONCA 45 , serves as an important reminder for both buyers and sellers in real estate transactions: clear communication is key when dealing with missed deadlines and potential breaches of an agreement of purchase and sale for property (APS).
On Tuesday, February 11, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware held in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al. v. ROSS Intelligence Inc. that the defendants unauthorized use of the plaintiffs copyrighted materials to train its legal research AI tool was not fair use. This ruling is the first reported case to address whether the use of copyrighted training data for AI training constitutes fair use.
After much anticipation, we are ready to announce this year's winners of the IPKat Book of the Year Awards! Best Patent Book Terrell on the Law of Patents, 20th edition Sweet & Maxwell by Andrew Waugh KC, Douglas Campbell KC, Tim Austen, Tom Hinchliffe KC, Tom Mitcheson KC (reviewed by The IPKat here ) Best Copyright Book The Routledge Companion to Copyright and Creativity in the 21st Century Routledge eds.
Software is complex, which makes threats to the software supply chain more real every day. 64% of organizations have been impacted by a software supply chain attack and 60% of data breaches are due to unpatched software vulnerabilities. In the U.S. alone, cyber losses totaled $10.3 billion in 2022. All of these stats beg the question, “Do you know what’s in your software?
On January 29, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction by the Northern District of West Virginia in favor of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. against Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd. (SB) and other biosimilar applicants. Regeneron had sued defendants for infringing its U.S. Patent No. 11,084,865, which covers formulations of aflibercept, a fusion protein that binds to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and is used to treat.
In an important copyright decision released earlier this week, Circuit Judge Bibas (sitting by designation) in a United States District Court granted Thomson Reuters summary judgement victories by finding that its Westlaw headnotes and key number system were protected by copyright and that the uses of the headnotes to train a competitive legal research tool was not a fair use.
As organizations increasingly integrate AI into their creative processes, its imperative to understand the ins and outs of intellectual property (IP) issues particularly concerning copyright protection. HR managers and in-house counsel can play a crucial role in ensuring that AI-assisted creations developed by your employees are eligible for copyright protection, thereby safeguarding your organizations best interests.
As organizations increasingly integrate AI into their creative processes, its imperative to understand the ins and outs of intellectual property (IP) issues particularly concerning copyright protection. HR managers and in-house counsel can play a crucial role in ensuring that AI-assisted creations developed by your employees are eligible for copyright protection, thereby safeguarding your organizations best interests.
By: Gavin Strube, Esq. and Irina Dashevsky, Esq. The legalization of industrial hemp in the 2018 Farm Bill resulted in the proliferation of thousands of consumable CBD and intoxicating hemp-derived products hitting the marketplace across the United States. These products are often manufactured without any regulatory oversight whatsoever. However, recently some states have begun to pass legislation and regulations to address such intoxicating hemp-derived products.
When it comes to protecting intellectual property (IP), there are always miles to go before you can sleep. A mid-stage business with proven concepts, realizing revenue and planning for growth, revisiting, and building a robust IP strategy is a critical foundation for long-term success. As companies mature, they accumulate valuable assetsfrom brand recognition to proprietary processes and even innovative inventionsall of which need to be safeguarded.
Love, innovation, and creativity have always gone hand in hand. From patented heart-shaped jewellery to chocolate brands protected with trade marks, romance has long inspired inventors and creators across the UK. Whilst you are busy planning the perfect gift, intellectual property (IP) is quietly playing cupid behind the scenes.
As the IPKat gazes out the window at the first hints of spring peeking through the winter gloom, she couldn't help but purr with excitement at the flurry of upcoming IP-related events and opportunities. IP Events Are your weekends empty without a discussion of AI and IP? Do not fear, the CIPIL Spring Conference "Is AI transforming IP? " takes place on Saturday, 29 March 2025.
Women and diverse employees have the technical skill and knowledge, yet their contributions are not patented at the same rate as those of their male counterparts.This toolkit can help organizations move the needle on achieving gender parity in innovation.
On this episode of The Briefing, Scott Hervey and Tara Sattler dive into the landmark Jack Daniels v. VIP Products case that changed trademark law. They break down the Supreme Courts ruling on trademark infringement vs. dilution and explore how a dog toy parody nearly tarnished Jack Daniels brand.
The U.S. International Trade Commission has issued a limited order banning certain power converter modules and computing systems from being imported into the U.S., in a final decision that upheld most of an administrative law judge's findings in the dispute over patents held by electronics company Vicor Corp.
Takeaways - -Intra-patent claim inconsistencies are errors correctible via reissue. -Subtle legal distinctions in reissue may require PTAB appeals. Patent prosecution errors occur. One such error that occurs is intra-patent claim inconsistencies that render claims indefinite and unenforceable. Precisely this situation occurred in TVnGO Ltd. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 861 F.
Originally posted 2015-08-20 15:23:42. Republished by Blog Post PromoterOriginally posted 2008-09-11 15:37:14. Republished by Blog Post Promoter When it comes to manufacturing, it’s all about price, right? Brand management and licensing gurus Oliver Herzfeld and Richard Bergovoy beg to differ, writing in Managing Intellectual Property that a casual attitude toward offshore manufacturing could end up […] The post Build American!
In an unexpected development, the judge in Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence a case concerning the use of copyrighted material to train an artificial intelligence (AI) model reversed much of his 2023 decision denying summary judgment on most issues, concluding that many issues could actually be resolved in Thomson Reuters favor on motions instead of going to a jury.
Albert Einstein is credited with saying the measure of intelligence is the ability to change. In September 2023, Judge Stephanos Bibassitting by designation in the District of Delawaredenied plaintiff Thomson Reuters motion for summary judgment on the issue of fair use in a Generative AI (GenAI) copyright lawsuit. On February 11, 2025, Judge Bibas issued an order contradicting that 2023 decision and granting the plaintiffs summary judgment motion on fair use and other copyright issues and.
The Federal Circuit's presumption that prior art is always enabled can lead it to "sacrifice true innovations based on earlier science fiction," the owner of invalidated food wrapping patents told the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday.
Recently, a federal court issued the first ruling on the closely watched issue of fair use in copyright infringement involving AI. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff on its direct infringement claim, and ruled that the defendants use of plaintiffs material to train its AI model was not a fair use.
The U.S. International Trade Commission has issued a final decision on Thursday that ice-making machines made by Korean kitchen appliance company Bluenix infringe patents owned by Japanese rival Hoshizaki, issuing a limited exclusion order against the importation of the machines and their components.
Thomson Reuters scored a major victory in one of the first cases dealing with the legality of using copyrighted data to train artificial intelligence (AI) models. In 2020, Thomson Reuters sued the now-defunct AI start-up Ross Intelligence for alleged improper use of Thomson Reuters materials, including case headnotes in its Westlaw search engine, to train its new AI model.
LG Electronics Inc. and TCL Industries Holdings Co. urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to reject the latest case asking the justices to review the Federal Circuit's use of one-word orders to affirm decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, saying the court has "repeatedly" skipped such challenges and shouldn't change tack now.
On this episode of The Briefing, Scott Hervey and Tara Sattler dive into the landmark Jack Daniels v. VIP Products case that changed trademark law. They break down the Supreme Courts ruling on trademark infringement vs. dilution and explore how a dog toy parody nearly tarnished Jack Daniels brand.
Three tech companies are taking issue at the Federal Circuit with jury instructions in a Texas case that implicate the U.S. Supreme Court's Alice decision, telling the Federal Circuit that the instructions "lower the standard for patent eligibility.
The district court erred by admitting untimely expert testimony on noninfringement and by refusing to grant a new trial after the jury found noninfringement. Trudell Medical International (Trudell) sued D R Burton Healthcare (Burton) for patent infringement. Burton disclosed expert testimony on noninfringement after the discovery cut-off and less than three weeks before trial.
A California federal judge upheld Thursday part of a new state law that the Association for Accessible Medicines alleged unlawfully restricted "reverse payment" settlements betweenmakers of brand-name and generic drugs, finding that the law's attempt to regulate deals outside of California runs afoul of the Constitution, but is otherwise valid.
A patents specification established a naming convention that applied to terms in the patents claims. Microchip Technology filed an IPR, arguing all claims of HD Silicon Solutions patent were invalid.The challenged patent was directed to a method of forming local-circuit interconnects by depositing a second film comprising tungsten..
A small biotech company's recent patent win, where the Federal Circuit held that even its limited domestic investments qualified it to sue at the U.S. International Trade Commission, makes clear that the ITC's powerful import bans aren't just available to major businesses, attorneys say.
The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit explained that written description and enablement are evaluated based on the subject matter that is claimed, not the products that practice those claims.
A Texas federal judge has granted X Corp.'s request to stay an infringement lawsuit from Sterling Computers Corp. over Sterling's content filtering patent while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board decides whether to initiate a review of the patent.
In response to a lawsuit for patent infringement, often a defendant will file aninter partesreview (IPR) challenging the validity of the asserted claims. How can a patentee avoid this scenario?
A California federal judge properly found that Spectrum Solutions LLC didn't infringe a COVID-19 test maker's patent directed to preserving biological samples, the Federal Circuit said Friday in an opinion written by a top patent judge visiting the court.
Davalos v. Baywaych Inc., 2024 WL 5344434, F.Supp.3d -, No. 21-11075-NMG (D. Mass. Sept. 30, 2024) The caption seems to be a typo, but its one of the many right of publicity etc. cases by models against adult clubs that used their images in online ads. The defendant here gets summary judgment on laches. The four images in dispute were posted on defendants Facebook page between August, 2013, and November, 2015.
A cosmetics distributor that was sued for trademark infringement and lost has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether attorney fees and costs awarded to the prevailing party should have been trimmed to account for a default judgment that was reversed and a mistrial attributed to the plaintiff's counsel.
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Allen Interchange LLC, 2025 WL 465815, No. 22-cv-1681 (KMM/JFD) (D. Minn. Feb. 11, 2025) This discovery dispute says some interesting things about gray market goods. This lawsuit involves claims and counterclaims between competitors selling Toyota parts to Toyota dealers in the United States. Toyota objected to Allens importation and sale of Toyota parts in the United States.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
114 
Let's personalize your content