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
The Copyright Claims Board has awarded a poet $5,000 in damages after her poem was used on infringing blankets. The post Poet Wins $5,000 in Case Over Infringing Blankets appeared first on Plagiarism Today.
The DMCA takedown procedure may not be perfect but, for those intending to use it, there’s an unambiguous step-by-step process that’s been in place for a quarter of a century. Needless to say, entities that deviate from the established rules can make life difficult for themselves as well as the intended recipients of takedown notices. That includes entities that attempt to use DMCA takedown notices to enforce trademark disputes, or prefer to avoid the DMCA altogether by portraying co
On December 5, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report reflecting the agencys investigation into third-party funding of patent litigation in the United States. While the GAO was unable to quantify the extent to which third parties are financing and taking an interest in infringement suits due to limited data on the subject, interviews with a range of industry stakeholders reflected mixed views on the impacts of disclosure requirements that could identify conflicts of i
Cloudflare, a global internet infrastructure company, offers various services to millions of users, including connectivity and privacy tools. While primarily a conduit for internet traffic, Cloudflare occasionally hosts content permanently on its servers. The company’s approach to copyright complaints differs based on the role it plays. If Cloudflare merely passes traffic along (for a website using their CDN), they forward DMCA takedown notices to the actual hosting provider, which is ofte
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?
Here is our recap of last weeks top IP developments including summaries of the posts on Madras HC’s setting aside another IPO order for being unreasoned, the use of name of the late singer M.S. Subbulakshmi on an award posthumously against the expressions in her will, and the Swiss Senate approval of FTA with India. This and a lot more in this weeks SpicyIP Weekly Review.
Musicians side with Internet Archive in legal battle, Bungie targets Bitcoin wallet and a new piracy crackdown in the UK. The post 3 Count: Bungie Bitcoin Battle appeared first on Plagiarism Today.
If you are having difficulty logging in or accessing the comments, please try resetting your password here: [link] – Dennis Continue reading this post on Patently-O.
Canadas largest media companies came together recently to file a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI, the owners of ChatGPT. I wrote about the suit , suggesting that the primary motivation behind the suit was likely the hope to kickstart settlement discussions with the hope of a licence. Robert Diab , a law professor at Thompson Rivers University, raised similar thoughts in his own piece on the lawsuit.
If you missed out on The IPKat last week, then join this Kat for a catch up on the latest IP cases, news, and opportunities. Image by Riana Harvey Trade Marks Jocelyn Bosse considered the Federal Court of Australias judgment in Caporaso Pty Ltd v Mercato Centrale Australia Pty Ltd , which assessed the consumer perception of a trade mark containing Italian language elements.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Monday, December 9, in a precedential decision affirmed a district court determination that Priceline.com and Booking.com did not infringe DDR Holdings U.S. Patent No. 7,818,399. The opinion was authored by Judge Chen. The 399 patent relates to generating a composite web page that combines certain visual elements of a host website with content from a third-party merchant, according to the CAFC opinion.
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.
The U.S. Patent Office issued the following 234 patents to persons and businesses in Indiana in October 2024: Patent Number Patent Title US 12129632 B2 Valve assembly for an electronic faucet US 12127560 B2 Synergistic fungicidal mixtures and compositions comprising 5-fluoro-4-imino-3-methyl-1-tosyl-3,4-dihydropyrimidin-2(1H)-one for fungal control (SDHI) US 12127719 B2 Integrated emergency wash and shower system US 12127942 B2 Customizable augments and methods for acetabular
In February, this blog will celebrate its 20th anniverary. I’ll make together a series of posts to celebrate the milestone, and I would benefit from your help. I would be grateful if you could email me (egoldman@gmail.com) your thoughts about one or more of the following topics: Who are you, and why do you read the blog? Out of the nearly 4,500 posts over the blog’s history, is there one post that stands out to you as a favorite or especially memorable?
Originally posted 2015-03-06 11:35:50. Republished by Blog Post PromoterFirst published March 3, 2011. When I sawSergiy Sivochek’s post about the PING PONG trademark, I thought it sounded familiar — and it is! Pamela Chestek and I swatted it back and forth down in the comments of this doohickey a while back. Seems that maybe, perhaps, […] The post Best of 2011: I feel like a table-tennis ball!
[ The post is co-authored with Sabeeh. ] In light of the controversy surrounding the rejection of BASFs divisional application, in Part I , we looked at the order granting a patent to its parent application. A few hours after this grant order, BASF co-incidentally filed its divisional application which was rejected by the Patent Office, despite BASFs request to condone the delay ( pdf ).
by Dennis Crouch Patent attorneys know that amending the specification can directly impact claim interpretation. The Federal Circuit in Phillips v. AWH Corp. placed the specification alongside claim language as foundational intrinsic evidence for claim construction, recognizing that the specification provides focused context for understanding claim terms as they would be understood by skilled artisans. 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed.
Image from here [This Post is co-authored by Swaraj, Praharsh, and Sabeeh] The November 28 order ( pdf ) of the Madras High Court is being extensively discussed among the patent attorneys circles of India as it deals with a unique situation concerning the timeframe to file a divisional application vis a vis grant of the parent application. The High Court was hearing an appeal by the EU chemical manufacturer BASF SE (Badische Anilin- und Sodafabrik) (appellant/ applicant) filed against a rejectio
The fact that a trade mark has been registered without opposition is no free pass for the trade mark owner. Conflicts can arise years after registration. One of the defences that can be raised in EU trade mark law is acquiescence ( Art. 61(1),(2) EUTMR ). The threshold for this defence is high, as a recent decision of the General Court shows. Background On 23 April 2007, Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists SLU (Vintae) filed for registration of EU trade mark no. 005851092 for the following sign: The
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.
Let's personalize your content