tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-74433608747248235222024-03-02T20:47:24.270-05:00OP-IP...accurate, timely information regarding popular intellectual property issues presented in a clever, witty and entertaining manner at a legal and technological level understandable by the general population, e.g. business people. Topics include copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret, privacy, Internet, social media, and more........
(* Disclaimer: All views expressed are exclusively those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Stites & Harbison, PLLC) Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-50723838425155243192023-08-21T14:08:00.006-04:002023-08-24T07:46:33.015-04:00"Paradise Lost" ... failed attempt to assert AI generated painting<h1 style="text-align: center;"> "Paradise Lost" </h1><h1 style="text-align: center;">... a failed attempt to assert copyright registration for AI generated painting </h1><p style="text-align: center;"><br /></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="470" data-original-width="615" height="245" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZjcMUCnsbASWdvqaGTHuP6s0fh30oyLfDlxTrbjzLTcmMPfLYJc5ZDhSYNitp0cdoDAPZIcjeiyaiILkNkHlLST9NbdkupcUGYkGUZ2GlXuERkf3CTFCpa5G7j2W7tJfEM5iqpoAlazUMIZcfTGulKadpSP9jIjhjzB4Gfa5jiZ_d3gEwoj8ygwdhFEU/w320-h245/Thaler-blog.JPG" title="“A Recent Entrance to Paradise”" width="320" /></a>In an attempt to assert copyright registration for an AI generated painting, facts matter. Computer system ("Creativity Machine") owner ("plaintiff"), asserted in a U.S. copyright registration application that his computer system, generated the work, "A recent Entrance to Paradise," (shown here) on its own and without any human involvement.</p></blockquote><p>The <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf">U.S. Copyright refused the registration on the grounds that it lacked authorship</a> (i.e. a human author). <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">See
<i>THALER V. PERLMUTTER</i>, 1:22-cv-01564,
(D.D.C.).</a></p><p>The computer owner (plaintiff) appealed the Copyright Office's rejection to federal court. In his appeal, he asserted new facts not in the copyright registration or before the Copyright Office, including that he..</p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>"<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf">provided instructions and directed his AI to
create the Work</a>",</li><li>"<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf">the AI s entirely controlled by [him]", and </a></li><li><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf">“the AI only operates at
[his] direction.”</a></li></ol><p></p><p><span>However, since these facts were not asserted in the copyright application, the court rejected their consideration in its decision. As a result the court agreed with the U.S. Copyright Office's refusal to grant copyright registration for the AI generated work. </span><a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956/gov.uscourts.dcd.243956.24.0_2.pdf" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">See <i>THALER V. PERLMUTTER</i>, 1:22-cv-01564, (D.D.C.).</a></p><p>Some commentators hail this copyright ruling as a victory for authors, artists, actors, and the like, over AI generated content for "would be" copyrightable works. The thinking is that if AI generated content is not copyrightable, then the AI generated content could be copied. And, without copyright protection, studios, publishers, television networks, etc., would be less likely to replace writers and actors with AI generated content.</p><p>Well, not so fast.... While this case underscores the principle that for U.S. copyright registration, the work must be the authorship of humans, the court did not dismiss the notion that AI generated content, that was directed to be produced by a human and controlled by a human could be subject to copyright registration. </p><p><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">Continue on to the full OP-IP Law Blog</a></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">© </span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> 2023</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: transparent; text-align: left;">(* Disclaimer: All views expressed are exclusively those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Stites & Harbison, PLLC)</span></p><p><br /></p>Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-72319275374779823952022-11-22T08:12:00.006-05:002022-12-01T07:05:33.907-05:00"Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker" Dog toy....Trademark infringement or is Jack Daniel's barking up the wrong tree ?<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEggj3ApduTQqlTWisWpp6qvbjCgruue9OR0tYgbBF-Hb7fHFBDTUhZFoSyfuYA4THQGvqE4FcZWdIibv9s4LXzv-J1H_sXYOIl2t1AuXnDFBjkDtxSPP8SLxYuCkdoZrmZI0fBIJ5lc8M8jCm737PEcyw-WNxFFER4TWAMwEUAfixihFSLQxsWf1_e8" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img alt="" data-original-height="303" data-original-width="404" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEggj3ApduTQqlTWisWpp6qvbjCgruue9OR0tYgbBF-Hb7fHFBDTUhZFoSyfuYA4THQGvqE4FcZWdIibv9s4LXzv-J1H_sXYOIl2t1AuXnDFBjkDtxSPP8SLxYuCkdoZrmZI0fBIJ5lc8M8jCm737PEcyw-WNxFFER4TWAMwEUAfixihFSLQxsWf1_e8" width="320" /></span></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #999999; font-size: 12px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">(AP Photo/Jessica Gresko)</span></span></td></tr></tbody></table><span style="font-family: inherit;">Does the dog toy, "Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker" (left) infringe Jack Daniel's trademark (see its bottle, right)?</span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">Jack Daniel's says YES.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">"VIP" (manufacturer of the Bad Spaniels toy) says NO.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: inherit;">The ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says NO.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Now the U.S. Supreme Court will review the trademark dispute with a hope that it will provide clarity of what is and is not trademark infringement under U.S. federal trademark law when one endeavors to incorporate elements in its product that reassemble another's trademark.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The specific legal issues and legal procedure at the heart of this trademark dispute that the U.S. Supreme Court will likely address are surely interesting to trademark attorneys, legal scholars, law professors, and law students to name a few. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal">But, since OP-IP is directed to the general business community and not what my Constitutional Law professor referred to as the "egg heads," a more interesting topic for consideration here is whether the <i>arguable</i> parody of the Jack Daniel's bottle (marks) (Bad Spaniel's toy) should be permissible or whether the Bad Spaniel's toy should be considered a trademark infringement. </p><p class="MsoNormal">The talking heads on both sides of the debate have weighed in for and against trademark infringement.</p><p class="MsoNormal">What do you say....</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">Continue on to the full OP-IP Law Blog</a></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">© </span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> 2022</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p><a href="https://www.stites.com/attorneys/stephen-j-weyer" style="background-color: transparent;">Learn more</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_GoBack"></a>(* Disclaimer: All views expressed are
exclusively those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Stites &
Harbison, PLLC)<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span face=""Calibri",sans-serif"></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="color: #771100;"> <a href="mailto:OP_IP@icloud.com">Stephen Weyer's email account ('OP_IP')</a></span></p>Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-33521811769912453502022-09-11T17:22:00.007-04:002022-09-12T08:30:32.590-04:00Section 101: The Wrath of Rader<div class="separator"><h1 style="text-align: left;"><span face=""Calibri",sans-serif"><span style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; text-align: left;"><span style="text-align: center;">Section 101: The Wrath of Rader</span></span></span></span></span></h1><span face=""Calibri",sans-serif"><span style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4o6VkYqlaxNOc5ACap2TFjB9uwyrXJvKMJ4fFV9Re9zq-v7vjqfKZ9W01hbG5IZOVvfedbsT1nJ3vIMdG_rMoeuTLv40MxpTzcHmMdXUzbrtDgoaufWHY7JjJoZcJMmcKxocFJutQWi4lCRXpLxPo8XawSvFskFVC7tSkulrEvlg5vJF7HgEBpKTj/w200-h196/rader2.jpg" /></span>Analysis by former Federal Circuit judge, Randall Rader about the Federal Circuit’s blundering of the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101 (in layperson's language, determination subject matter eligible for patenting)<a href="https://www.law360.com/articles/1527779/rader-calls-out-fed-circ-s-role-in-patent-law-confusion?nl_pk=2d47167e-00d9-45da-b1b5-4a264f872ee2&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=special&utm_content=19948" style="clear: right; display: inline; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;">"Rader Calls Out Fed. Circ.'s Role In Patent Law Confusion” - Law360</a>) is spot on. Many followers to <a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> have heard me rag on the Federal Circuit for making the determination of patent eligibility under § 101 more confusing than less. Rader was quoted as saying "Sadly, the Federal Circuit, the court that should be identifying problems, is instead doing exactly the opposite and perpetuating them." To that I say, Amen!</span></span></span></div><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiylVGWlS7zF3-YCZKXijOF6kKqnax4B140dh_KN1FWwQCoKvY16un0vHDGpjni8HCaHbgFrOIziasN6yK03qtJhBXLsusK24r3ZUyfjmkg7zPdD06qmG2UCmj-3f23GUFJUIDflvh8nm0aHaB1F7__0zf_W5uIJYtWLMx2Pilq22ERM45pvdc6SiTN/s2000/Sct.JPG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1500" data-original-width="2000" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiylVGWlS7zF3-YCZKXijOF6kKqnax4B140dh_KN1FWwQCoKvY16un0vHDGpjni8HCaHbgFrOIziasN6yK03qtJhBXLsusK24r3ZUyfjmkg7zPdD06qmG2UCmj-3f23GUFJUIDflvh8nm0aHaB1F7__0zf_W5uIJYtWLMx2Pilq22ERM45pvdc6SiTN/s320/Sct.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>Rader did not limit his ire to the Federal Circuit. Rather he purportedly also acknowledged that the Supreme Court is no friend to those trying to understand what is and is not patent eligible, figuratively assigning “poor grades” to the unworkable Supreme Court decisions in <i>Alice v. CLS Bank </i>and its other subsequent judicial decisions directed to establishing patent eligibility. <a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/eyewitness-prognostications-confirmed.html">As someone who had a front row seat at the oral augments in <i>Alice</i></a>, <a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/eyewitness-prognostications-confirmed.html">(click for OP-IP analysis)</a> the Supreme Court whiffed at an opportunity to define and clarify the metes and bound of an "abstract idea." The lack of guidance is even more disheartening when you consider that the Supreme Court, itself, created the judicial exception disqualifying "abstract ideas" from patenting. See <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/55/156/"><i>Le Roy v. Tatham</i>, 55 U.S. 156 (1852)</a>. In other words, the Supreme Court's own precedent established "abstract ideas" as disqualifying an invention (subject matter) from patent eligibility, yet, the Supreme Court refuses to define what is or is not an abstract idea, how to identify an abstract idea, and when an idea is abstract and when an idea is not abstract. <div><br /></div><div>But, all hope is not lost. Judge Rader has called <a href="https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2022/09/09/barks-bites-friday-august-9-rader-calls-cafc-jcpa-fails-move-committee-teva-scotus-reply-urges-review-skinny-label-inducement-case/id=151312/">for all that care about protecting patent rights of inventors and startups to step up and do what needs to be done to effect change.</a> </div><div><br /></div><div>So what does that mean? For some that may be becoming more active in trade organizations that present their challenges to Congress. For legal organizations, e.g. ABA, AIPLA, etc. that may be to continue efforts to propose legislative reforms to clarify patent eligibly so that its determination is not subject to an unworkable algorithm.</div><div><br /></div><div>We would love to hear what others propose for making the determination of patent subject matter eligibility easily, more consistently and much more objectively determined.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'll get that conversation going. Consider the following possible revision to the §101 patent eligibility statute language...</div><div><p class="MsoNormal">35 U.S. Code § 101 - Inventions patentable <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;">Whoever invents or [discovers] <u>creates</u>
any [new and] useful <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=35-USC-309518737-410584067&term_occur=999&term_src=">process</a>,
machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any [new and] useful
improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, <span style="background-color: #fcff01;">SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS
AND REQUIREMENTS OF THIS TITLE</span>.* <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;">(* subject to the conditions...allows for the deletion of "new" as this concept is covered by §§ 102 and 103, and more importantly, has led to patent eligibility test(s) that included a novelty, newness or level of innovation analysis; deletion of "discovers" seen as possibly problematic leading to the consideration of things "discovered" that exist in nature, naturally occurring or mathematical phenomena and were not invented, created or implemented by inventors, i.e. humans**) </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span> </span>(**humans...a conversation for another blog post)</p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">Continue on to the full OP-IP Law Blog</a></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">© </span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> 2022</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p><a href="https://www.stites.com/attorneys/stephen-j-weyer" style="background-color: transparent;">Learn more</a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span face=""Calibri",sans-serif"></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="color: #771100;">sweyer@stites.com</span></p><p>
<br /></p></div>Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-77222157766673562002022-03-21T16:27:00.005-04:002022-03-22T15:28:31.297-04:00Ba da ba ba ba ♫ ... I'm NOT Lovin' it...<p></p><h1 style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Ba da ba ba ba ♫ ... I'm NOT Lovin' it...</h1><p></p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj59UY8OcC4qmJr8fjMQzYkkG-0XWsrYdliAes2F7AN8TcW9cbVGCiEwvh-SSRWobeAH2RmWsVRBoqsl4Mt_Cexs-nD6UWShb3K6VVEqh11sCXEuO8U5I0LEHDEf-xlNY1Jo_mwNPU5S5lVsbQOtVALOujP1NADj28jQDVK_LmIjZ7Jt9uZUemcMSqD" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="153" data-original-width="65" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj59UY8OcC4qmJr8fjMQzYkkG-0XWsrYdliAes2F7AN8TcW9cbVGCiEwvh-SSRWobeAH2RmWsVRBoqsl4Mt_Cexs-nD6UWShb3K6VVEqh11sCXEuO8U5I0LEHDEf-xlNY1Jo_mwNPU5S5lVsbQOtVALOujP1NADj28jQDVK_LmIjZ7Jt9uZUemcMSqD=w85-h200" width="85" /></a>The world is watching in horror as one country, Russia, has
invaded another country, the sovereign nation of Ukraine. Countless thousands of lives have been lost
and more will die as the war wages on.
The vast and overwhelming majority of the world is behind Ukraine and against
the unprovoked invasion by Russia, standing for peace over the aggression of Russia.</div><o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Countries in solidarity against Russia have imposed sanctions
against Russia knowing that doing so may have economic and other consequences from Russian retaliation. One form of Russian’s
retaliation has been to <a href="https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/united-states-halts-work-with-russian-1849952/" target="_blank">suspend enforcement of patents owned by companies and individuals from “unfriendly countries.”</a> Not surprisingly, the U.S. and those of
the European Patent Organization (EPO) are on the Russia “unfriendly” list.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">What this means for U.S. patent owners is that they cannot
enforce their Russian patents.
Accordingly, such Russian patents held by U.S. companies and individuals
can be infringed by anyone in Russia rendering the patents worthless to U.S.
companies and individuals.</p><p class="MsoNormal">And, while as of this post, U.S. owners of trademarks and
copyrights have not had their intellectual property rights rendered worthless, it
seems like it's only a matter of time.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://new.fips.ru/registers-doc-view/fips_servlet?DB=RUTMAP&rn=3512&DocNumber=2022715219&TypeFile=html" rel="nofollow" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;" target=""><img alt="" data-original-height="944" data-original-width="944" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhzHwm2Di0Lw3QDeHnWdEZLjSC7_WCN1W9jsANSdGZb7YZ0apoue9i-N_TAjUthuQbeG1yOzdPzp7-r92A69emrAovHOJwDa4OuV3nrPZmCRELcckiQeCrL-eVZE-dxrdL9yjoCbmuorb20g3ZXz8yW-YYNwbhHMfVfhvjgny9XYS_7w_vKgQZRrI7H" width="240" /></a></div>For example, many are aware that several U.S. companies have
closed restaurants and businesses in Russia including McDonald’s which closed
around 850 locations. Not allowing these
store fronts to go abandon, a Russian burger joint, Uncle Vanya has applied for <a href="https://new.fips.ru/registers-doc-view/fips_servlet?DB=RUTMAP&rn=3512&DocNumber=2022715219&TypeFile=html" rel="nofollow" target="">trademark protection of a logo</a> that can only be characterized as confusingly
similar to the iconic golden arches. To the right is a copy of the trademark
application’s logo for registration. The
party line explanation (a.k.a. propaganda) for the logo is that it is to represent the Cyrillic
letter “B” which is the English equivalent of the letter “V,” representing the initial
for Vanya. <p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>Needless to say, McDonald’s cannot be happy with an interloper
burger joint using a clearly intentionally similar mark to mislead Russian
consumers. Stated differently, McDonald’s
is not singing the phrases of this attempt to usurp its trademark or to
paraphrase (and taking liberties of) one of McDonald’s trademark phrases, “Ba da ba ba ba ♫ ... I'm [NOT]
Lovin' it...”<o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We will continue to work with our clients now and in the
future to protect and preserve their intellectual property rights in Russia.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">Continue on to the full OP-IP Law Blog</a></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">© </span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> 2022</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p><a href="https://www.stites.com/attorneys/stephen-j-weyer" style="background-color: transparent;">Learn more</a></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333;">Send
email feedback- </span><span style="color: #771100;">sweyer@stites.com</span><o:p></o:p></p><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><p></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p></p></blockquote><p><br /><br /></p>Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-53388312894743208702021-10-28T12:25:00.007-04:002023-07-06T16:12:01.878-04:00Munchies for the stone age<h1 style="text-align: left;"><center><a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2021/10/munchies-for-stone-age.html">MUNCHIES FOR THE STONE AGE</a></center></h1><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAwpi5ZPh0zVsL-URG_i1ZErAsJF5yCx5keiB1QyogbJnzcl5XM5UwlTMZgyMPrYvaBjcSI4-1KIHGZJkOzeKCe3EXT0vVhAfenfk3-T9efDJHbF5rup1KkkRnul_prwKyfxmzr8QTFcs/s185/stone-patch.JPG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="178" data-original-width="185" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAwpi5ZPh0zVsL-URG_i1ZErAsJF5yCx5keiB1QyogbJnzcl5XM5UwlTMZgyMPrYvaBjcSI4-1KIHGZJkOzeKCe3EXT0vVhAfenfk3-T9efDJHbF5rup1KkkRnul_prwKyfxmzr8QTFcs/w140-h135/stone-patch.JPG" width="140" /></a></div><br />If you're like me, you love a good salty or sweet snack, right? And, no judgment here, but there are those who also enjoy "recreational" products as well. Up to now, if you wanted to have your snacks combined with your recreational products, you had to make the <a href="https://theweedscene.com/funky-fruity-pebble-treats/">combination yourself</a>. <p></p><p>But what if you could have "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJLDF6qZUX0">two great tastes that taste great together</a>" prepared for you that you could simply buy at the store or even better, online?</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDrGVHts90PH0Ces_SKlgNV8oQ94CWbBrhUDFLrtLOFVzrsMU3H0Mp-UpFW93NbGCAXSk65rzD7hxaODkwxaqTUw_j0p3zSeKmIXc5O5Qn7V4tE_NkTdqIkhzAvkb7Lh4NhM2K9iQDd3c/s239/oreo.JPG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="154" data-original-width="239" height="117" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDrGVHts90PH0Ces_SKlgNV8oQ94CWbBrhUDFLrtLOFVzrsMU3H0Mp-UpFW93NbGCAXSk65rzD7hxaODkwxaqTUw_j0p3zSeKmIXc5O5Qn7V4tE_NkTdqIkhzAvkb7Lh4NhM2K9iQDd3c/w181-h117/oreo.JPG" width="181" /></a></div>Lucky for you, you live now, in the "stone age" where you can purchase cannabis-laced snacks. And, just in time of Halloween, <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimberleespeakman/2021/10/26/sour-patch-or-stoney-patch-parents-warned-of-cannabis-laced-halloween-candy/?sh=2af13a951a78">cannabis-laced candy</a> is available that gives a new meaning to "fun size" candy. As a result, states are warning parents to be on the lookout for knock-off candy such as Sour Patch Kids candy (labeled "STONEY PATCH" shown above) and Oreo cookies (e.g. "Double Stuf STONEO" shown on the right).<p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMP9omg8q180bI5hTUZ6a9YDdj1ZwUmHhRK9w4_PWTgYV3x3BNzcXEjVlHbmG07aSSYOcEteCnePZ-pKqTZSSwOU1mKyL_2g-_6WixdSFmDZ0uUw2enmaDOCre7iOVlXQF-VZRVwjPs_0/s215/fruity-pebbles.JPG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="215" data-original-width="162" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhMP9omg8q180bI5hTUZ6a9YDdj1ZwUmHhRK9w4_PWTgYV3x3BNzcXEjVlHbmG07aSSYOcEteCnePZ-pKqTZSSwOU1mKyL_2g-_6WixdSFmDZ0uUw2enmaDOCre7iOVlXQF-VZRVwjPs_0/w102-h135/fruity-pebbles.JPG" width="102" /></a></div><p></p><p>To be very clear, these cannabis-laced snacks and candy are unauthorized, knock-off products, and in no way associated with the respective famous products' manufacturers. The makers of these cannabis-laced products are violating numerous laws and regulations. Accordingly, <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2021/consumer-alert-attorney-general-james-issues-alert-protect-children-deceptive">multiple states' attorneys general</a> are actively perusing the manufacturers of these cannabis-laced products. </p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK3nfdSY__vJEd66MBZ-L0bR27RtWHhK_Iv4SBY9NM7S8cAK5Ke1WZWAwZj7whBCy3r_EbChFMgbafHvAawPNUTPVJRIzmEJy7oszZjm_JJqwD-jXPWOq8uN26VDU9u-B3KFj49d7gTrc/s228/doritos.JPG" style="clear: right; display: inline; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="228" data-original-width="154" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK3nfdSY__vJEd66MBZ-L0bR27RtWHhK_Iv4SBY9NM7S8cAK5Ke1WZWAwZj7whBCy3r_EbChFMgbafHvAawPNUTPVJRIzmEJy7oszZjm_JJqwD-jXPWOq8uN26VDU9u-B3KFj49d7gTrc/w91-h135/doritos.JPG" width="91" /></a></div>In addition, these cannabis-laced product <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">manufacturers</span> and distributers are infringing the better known (original) products manufacturers' valuable intellectual property rights which include but not limited to trademark infringement, tarnishment, dilution, unfair competition, passing off, etc.<p></p><p>Finally, I'd be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the fact that I have been away from blogging for a while. <a href=" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNXhh7D9_cA">But in the timeless words of Frank Costanza, I'm back baby!</a></p><div><br /></div><div><div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></div><div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span face=""arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #333333; font-size: 11pt;">© <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100; font-family: "times new roman" , serif;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a></span><span style="color: #333333; font-size: 11pt;"> 2021</span></div><p><o:p></o:p></p><div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="color: #333333; font-size: 13.5pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="color: #771100; font-size: 13.5pt;">sweyer@stites.com</span></div><p><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5; margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><br /></p></div>Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-83980395029473173062019-05-28T10:20:00.000-04:002019-05-30T11:49:07.688-04:00Precision/personalized medicine and intellectual property: Balancing Public Health and Innovation<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Precision / personalized Medicine and Intellectual Property:
Balancing Public Health and Innovation</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Summary<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghAoAoFLUVq3Zt_O00IUYaNR17MSSJIQe5gduZPoxpKtORaGIR0dnBqd3jZ7CaT71NBmq14K78TrS2GEby0hRiX6GowvLE7qLH-ySoGCG4jdB3CnB4TQNClrqFXLMF8EPZLctnY_DVEuU/s1600/prec_pic.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="333" data-original-width="979" height="108" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghAoAoFLUVq3Zt_O00IUYaNR17MSSJIQe5gduZPoxpKtORaGIR0dnBqd3jZ7CaT71NBmq14K78TrS2GEby0hRiX6GowvLE7qLH-ySoGCG4jdB3CnB4TQNClrqFXLMF8EPZLctnY_DVEuU/s320/prec_pic.png" width="320" /></a></div>
Medical technology, diagnostics and treatment, are becoming
increasingly personalized or individualized. “<a href="http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/center-for-individualized-medicine/personalized-medicine.asp">Precision medicine</a>” (aka
personalize medicine) is the term used to describe the revolution in
biotechnology in which precision is used to identify not only a disease
condition and general treatment but a specific abnormality or predisposition and
a narrowly tailored treatment for the specific abnormality of that individual
based on the individual’s biological makeup, genes or condition. Often
this involves identification of specific biological markers, proteins or genes,
correlated to an identified health condition, and treating the identified
condition with a biological / pharmaceutical agent specifically tailored to the
specific individual and condition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dy85MWAiFJLTUjFZNO8VjIFX-wxxpOWoy_DDgNgxmOGbV7ElOW745pFeR8zWRgAxQr98maW0pkALRnfwk74UA' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
At the 2019 ITechLaw World Conference in Boston (May 15-17),
I gave a presentation and led a discussion on intellectual property issues
pertaining to precision medicine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> First, w</span>e discussed
this revolutionary new tool in medical diagnostics and treatment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Next, we reflected on current intellectual laws
with a foundation in the industrial age for historical context.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Finally, we discussed current intellectual property laws' applicability to precision
medicine to explore whether existing intellectual property laws are a benefit
to public health and innovation or a hindrance. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br />
<br />
My PowerPoint slides from the presentation are available for
download and the following discussion summarizes the presentation: </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><a href="https://od.lk/s/Nl8xNzMyNTEzNDhf/Precision_personalized_medicine_and_intellectual_property__Balancing_Public_Health_and_Innovation%28abridged%29.pptx">Abridged
presentation (minus some embedded video clips, but with hyperlinks to them)</a> (7 meg)</li>
<li><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><a href="https://od.lk/s/Nl8xNzMyNTEzMDVf/ITechLaw_Boston_Conference_Presentiation__Precision_personalized_medicine_and_intellectual_property__Balancing_Public_Health_and_Innovation%28abridged3%29.pptx">Unabridged
presentation</a> (125 meg)</li>
</ul>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Discussion<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Precision medicine by definition is specific to an individual.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For any particular condition, the diagnostic may
need to be adjusted to specifically identify the abnormality in the
individual.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Likewise, the specific
treatment of the abnormality in an individual may need to be specifically
tailored to that particular individual.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Conceivably, a different diagnostic and a different therapeutic
treatment may be required for each individual to be treated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As a result, pharmaceutical companies and
diagnostic laboratories may not be able to mass produce broad spectrum
diagnostics and broad spectrum treatments.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Instead, the future of biotechnology almost certainly suggests that this
will not be the case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Further, the
traditional financial incentives in which biotechnology companies can recoup
research and development costs of diagnostics and treatments by mass producing
a diagnostic and treatment likely will need to change. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Current intellectual property rights
that are in place to provide limited monopolies in exchange for public
disclosure of new technology may not be appropriate for the new precision
medicine paradigm. For example, use of the patent system may not be applicable
since a virtual infinite number of diagnostics and/or infinite number of
therapeutic treatments may need to be individually developed and hence patented
to cover the physical diagnostic tool and/or therapeutic agent. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Further, while one might consider that a method of treatment or method of diagnostic may be patentable, patent eligibility of such subject matter has been highly scrutinized and even ineligible for patenting under some countries’ patent laws. Many countries’ patent laws have limitations on the patenting of subject matter relating to diagnostic methods and treatments based on correlation of natural physical conditions and products of natural. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For example, recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have limited the subject matter eligible for patent protection for inventions relating to natural products and correlations. See, e.g.:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;">–<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><b><i><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf">Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc</a>.</i></b>, 569 U.S. 576 (2013)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 1in; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;">–<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><b><i><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1150.pdf">Mayo v. Prometheus</a></i></b>, 566 U.S. 66 (2012)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, often precision medicine involves diagnostics and identification of a “natural” biologically occurring abnormality (i.e. a naturally phenomenon) correlated to a health or disease condition and treatment involves administering a naturally occurring biological or chemical product (i.e. a product of nature) to address the abnormality. Therefore, patent protection may not be available for
precision medicine diagnostics and treatments.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In addition, other forms of IP protection may not be
applicable for precision medicine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While
data exclusivity and/or trade secret protection have been used for prior
technologies, relying exclusively on trade secret protection may thwart the
public interest in having the full disclosure of the diagnostic tool and/or
treatment so that other companies can build on the technology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, relying on trade secret protection
may hinder the advancement of precision medicine such that it does not realize
its full potential.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is important to reflect on the purpose of an intellectual
property system such as the patent system and data exclusivity for biologics, which is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">quid pro quo</i>
in which the public receives the benefit of the new technology in exchange for
exclusivity by the developer of the technology.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>As a result, the limited monopoly provides exclusivity so that the
company investing in the technology can recoup its investment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Without the ability to recoup investment
costs, companies may not develop new diagnostics and new treatments to advance
precision medicine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Up to this point,
much of the research and development of precision medicine not surprisingly has
been done by non‑profit universities and research facilities funded by grant
money and government subsidies so these institutions do not have the same
pressures to recoup investment costs as the public sector.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As research dollars become tighter and
governments which fund research have limited resources, relying exclusively on
universities and government research funding may not be the best way to advance
precision medicine.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As always, a counterargument can be made that strong
intellectual property will benefit only a small number of companies resulting
in high costs of the precision medicine to individuals (i.e. patients) and as a
result will prevent some individuals from access to the precision
medicine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Opponents to this theory will
say that however, without strong intellectual property rights, the precision
medicine would not be developed for anyone as without strong intellectual
property rights which provide for recouping investments costs, companies would
not take the time and invest money to develop the precision medicine in the
first place.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> </o:p> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I invite all to post your comments here on this topic to keep the
discussion going.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Please provide your thoughts
and remarks on whether current intellectual property rights are a benefit or a
hindrance to the development and deployment of precision medicine.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">© <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="color: #771100; font-family: "times new roman" , serif;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a></span><span style="color: #333333; font-size: 11.0pt;"> 2019</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<o:p></o:p>
<br />
<div align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-size: 13.5pt;">Send email
feedback- </span><span style="color: #771100; font-size: 13.5pt;">sweyer@stites.com</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-6812611653145810082019-01-31T16:08:00.000-05:002019-01-31T16:08:49.907-05:00Locast's attempt to sneak re-broadcast streaming live television under non-profit copyright exemption<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Locast's Attempt to
Sneak Re-broadcast Streaming Live Television Under Non-profit Copyright
Exemption<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Stop
if you have heard this before.... A
start-up company takes a television antenna (commonly referred to as an over-the-air
(OTA) antenna), attaches it to an HDTV receiver, connects the receiver to a
computer server, invites the public (one device at a time) to log into the
server, and then streams live television from the server to the device. Sound familiar? Hint, Aereo tried this in the early part of
the decade only to have the U.S. Supreme Court find Aereo liable for copyright
infringement for unauthorized rebroadcast of the broadcasters' content. See </span><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/supreme-court-finds-aereos-emerging.html" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">Supreme
Court finds Aereo's Emerging Online Streaming Technology Hits Copyright
Infringement Bullseye</a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;">. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.locast.org/" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="https://www.locast.org/" border="0" data-original-height="576" data-original-width="813" height="141" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPQUonCHgRMARnUQ0Q4KdG_2pJKjYtuQ7ibWUH7kxi6RdpKaM2N1A2DOJ_dIkFgs-55pOdQvEpvl8q8RkEZSuIqiHo2i3UcU2-txUrTYyTlsWBxblEPenD8n0VjVuG-uNo6VA4s9Zq-K8/s200/map.JPG" title="" width="200" /></a>Start-up company, <a href="https://www.locast.org/">Locast</a>,
has a new twist on streaming live television by capturing broadcasters’
television signals and streaming their content.</div>
<o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what is <a href="https://www.locast.org/">Locast’s</a> strategy
for avoiding the same fate as Aereo and being found liable for copyright
infringement?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First, let’s look at the technology that Locast is
using.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Locast’s technology is basically
unremarkable: a single antenna, a single receive, a single server, and multiple
users.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is completely different than
Aereo’s novel and unique technology aimed at a futile attempt to avoid copyright restrictions on
public performance / re-transmission of broadcasters’ content, by using a separate
antenna for each transmission, and assert that the transmission is not “public”
but private transmission, albeit multiple, single transmissions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, unlike the "for profit" company, Aereo, Locast aims
low as a "non-profit" organization.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As a
non-profit, Locast hopes to slide under the non-profit exemption that allows
non-profit companies to “secondary transmission of broadcast programing by <u>cable</u>.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">17 U.S.C. § 111 (a) (5) (emphasis
added). </a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For argument sake, let’s assume that Locast is really a
non-profit and in keeping with the statutory requirements of <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">§ 111 (a)(5)</a>, it does not have direct or indirect commercial
benefit or advantage in the service. <o:p></o:p></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Seems like, so far, so good for Locast. But, wait...
Not so fast….<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Subsequent to Aereo being found liable for copyright infringement
for separately streaming broadcasts’ content to respective subscribers
(viewers), Aereo applied for a license with the U.S. Copyright Office to be an
authorized re-broadcaster/distributor or cable provider under the compulsory
licensing provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">17 U.S.C. § 111</a> (<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">§111</a>), “secondary
transmission of broadcast programing by <u>cable</u>.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The important word in the statute is “<u>cable</u>.” The U.S. Copyright Office denied Aereo’s
application based on a finding that Internet streaming does not meet the
definition of cable under § 111. Therefore, the Copyright Office denied Aereo's
request to pay compulsory licensing fees to retransmit broadcast television
signals over the Internet. See <a href="https://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/07/aereos-online-streaming-broadcast-tv.html">Aereo's
Online Streaming Broadcast TV Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place.</a><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Based on how the U.S. Copyright Office interpreted “cable”
re-broadcast and streaming content to not be equivalent in the context of compulsory
licensing broadcasters’ content under <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">§ 111</a>, it looks like Locast may have a
steep climb to get out of potential copyright infringement hole that it has
dug. Time will tell….<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;">© <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span id="goog_903128279"></span><span style="color: #771100; font-family: "inherit",serif;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a></span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "inherit",serif; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"> 2019</span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: "inherit",serif; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">Send
email feedback- <span class="apple-style-span"><span style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294);"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: #771100;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></span></span><span style="color: #333333; font-family: "Arial",sans-serif; font-size: 11.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-7450914031787600132017-03-24T08:20:00.002-04:002017-03-31T17:49:26.224-04:00Give me a “C-O-P-Y-R-I-G-H-T-A-B-L-E” for Cheerleader Uniform Designs<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
Give me a “C-O-P-Y-R-I-G-H-T-A-B-L-E” spells Copyrightable Protection for Cheerleader Uniform
Designs<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE7-_TMIvc1A5zVu6qKt1P6mOGp-gpWqnLM-ze4_dPogUPXN71nOdGD1eafmmyJ5xjLhhMNO7JWncanq3oAJUykn3O-zHjVXFFLndj200MpATnul7K1ES0y7HjF-zJxhBiC4R-q48HZ1I/s1600/299A1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE7-_TMIvc1A5zVu6qKt1P6mOGp-gpWqnLM-ze4_dPogUPXN71nOdGD1eafmmyJ5xjLhhMNO7JWncanq3oAJUykn3O-zHjVXFFLndj200MpATnul7K1ES0y7HjF-zJxhBiC4R-q48HZ1I/s200/299A1.JPG" width="150" /></a><br />
“Six” cheers for copyright protection for cheerleader
uniforms. In a 6-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme
Court in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-866_0971.pdf">Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. VarsityBrands, Inc.</a> proclaimed Varsity Brands’ cheerleader uniforms are entitled to copyright protection. Varsity Brand’s victory over Star Athletica re-confirms copyright protection as a viable option for protecting the design
of useful articles of manufacture. Time
will tell if U.S. copyrights will upset U.S. design patents as the champion of protection
of designs of useful articles.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The subject at the heart of this epic copyright contest are
cheerleader uniforms such as the ones reproduced in this article.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirapj9eo0xHJx_CzpqnxupsvMmpt8JDGLQejmZBhtGHfqG1oEmxpze7O3qJoQ245GljidFx_I7WUygRJT1W4_BglFcHlnEGX59C7_n_Fq6ipTCtSEv6y6D4Gpx8KRySVpjRSXH81PFFdY/s1600/299B.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirapj9eo0xHJx_CzpqnxupsvMmpt8JDGLQejmZBhtGHfqG1oEmxpze7O3qJoQ245GljidFx_I7WUygRJT1W4_BglFcHlnEGX59C7_n_Fq6ipTCtSEv6y6D4Gpx8KRySVpjRSXH81PFFdY/s200/299B.JPG" width="159" /></a>Many are aware that U.S. copyright protection is afforded to artistic
works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression such as works of fine,
graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art. What might surprise some is that the U.S. copyright law extends
limited copyright protection for pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works incorporated
into a “useful article” if the artistic features “can be identified separately
from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of
the article.” <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html">17 U. S. C. §101</a>. In particular, the <a href="https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html">U.S. Copyright Act</a> establishes
a special rule for copyrighting a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work
incorporated into a “useful article,” which is defined as “an article having an
intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of
the article or to convey information.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A design incorporated into a useful article qualifies for copyright
protection only if the design features:<o:p></o:p></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of
art separate from the useful article and<br />
(2) the design would qualify as a protectable pictorial,
graphic, or sculptural work—either on its own or fixed in some other tangible
medium of expression— if it were imagined separately from the useful article into
which it is incorporated. </blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizHsZEy3J_7yLIrCnFd1F7O8OLQ3MhehPvWtBYQKTteD4wM0p_Ae4vP7ctOyUXYqb11WXOKO_3KoMjBvmEt99t91Dvj-wwXTLp5tzkUiWCcoAYhUsBZHx7a0DQKM6MyERrBWQeEnVsM0I/s1600/815.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizHsZEy3J_7yLIrCnFd1F7O8OLQ3MhehPvWtBYQKTteD4wM0p_Ae4vP7ctOyUXYqb11WXOKO_3KoMjBvmEt99t91Dvj-wwXTLp5tzkUiWCcoAYhUsBZHx7a0DQKM6MyERrBWQeEnVsM0I/s200/815.JPG" width="121" /></a>In this case, the Supreme Court held that the designs of the
cheerleader uniforms (useful articles) are entitled to copyright protection since
the designs (1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art
separate from the useful article and (2) the designs qualify as protectable
pictorial or graphic when imagined separately from the useful
articles (cheerleader uniforms). The Court determined that the arrangements of
lines, chevrons, and colorful shapes appearing on the surface of the cheerleading
uniforms are eligible for copyright protection as separable features of the
design of those cheerleading uniforms.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The significance of this decision is the strengthening of intellectual
property protection for artistic designs of useful articles. Where, in the past, one may have relied solely on
U.S. design patents to protect the intellectual property of the look or
appearance of a useful article of manufacture, U.S. copyright protection may also be
available to protect the intellectual property of the design of a useful
article of manufacture.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">© </span><span id="goog_903128279" style="font-family: inherit;"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer" style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2017</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com">sweyer@stites.com</a></span></span></span></span></span></div>
</div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-16462872729020996252016-04-12T11:49:00.000-04:002016-04-14T21:18:12.013-04:00“Stairway to Copyright Infringement”- Step Two in Spirit's uphill climb to prove Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' infringes its copyright<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhigcgKhPKKSWKjA2bkOakPyiWDI8w_5AuLWep4nJ4HOV9D9zegP9FyH5z3-J3lppx3DUJIWd_WjR3Yghh-B_sP-CJ9j3vs6cM_e9GSJ9TNci5ZUKpA8bWASO-NTRE7WFSK0NDjW0EkRgE/s1600/stairway.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" height="135" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhigcgKhPKKSWKjA2bkOakPyiWDI8w_5AuLWep4nJ4HOV9D9zegP9FyH5z3-J3lppx3DUJIWd_WjR3Yghh-B_sP-CJ9j3vs6cM_e9GSJ9TNci5ZUKpA8bWASO-NTRE7WFSK0NDjW0EkRgE/s1600/stairway.JPG" width="200" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "times new roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span>Followers of this blog and classic rock fans everywhere with a keen interest in the nuances of copyright infringement will recall that Led
Zeppelin is being sued by the band Spirit for copyright infringement based on
Zeppelin's immortal song which Spirit alleges lifted portions from its guitar
instrumental, Taurus. </span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">The judge in the infringement suit has just now cleared the way for the </span><a href="http://wtop.com/music/2016/04/judge-clears-stairway-to-heaven-copyright-case-for-trial-2/" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;">'Stairway to Heaven' copyright case to proceed to trial</a><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> next week (reported on WTOP.COM). </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This morning, I again listened to both the
introduction of Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven
and Spirit's Tarsus instrumental (links to both at the bottom of this post). While there are
similarities, there are differences as well. As one commentary to my original post put it, the Spirit instrumental is a standard chord progression whereas the introduction to Stairway to Heaven is much more than that.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The group, Axis of Awesome, very creatively demonstrated that a series of four chords makes up hundreds of popular songs, tens of which are featured in their song "Four Chords" (link below). Yet most would agree that each of the songs featured are themselves unique creative works.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/oOlDewpCfZQ/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oOlDewpCfZQ?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , "sans-serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;">Previously reported in my 2014 post entitled, “<a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/10/stairway-to-copyright-infringement-step.html">Stairway to Copyright Infringement”- Step One in Spirit's uphill climb to prove Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' infringes its copyright</a>", </span></span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Led Zeppelin was sued by the band Spirit for copyright infringement based on Zeppelin's immortal song which Spirit alleges lifted portions from its guitar instrumental, </span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Taurus. Spirit has now advanced past step two, convincing the judge that there is sufficient evidence to conduct a trial for copyright infringement.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">
</span><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-gfJiQeUMPX_f8LCNxTxPWkiz2htUz9SnYaXAqdzSRZKA97S19YJbowLgkxLlS-wMM2WgDwOfCCB-JDurMM21g0lhZ0EOxnm3GSSDw-5-LrZk2MosQ3MqFJEIFxnLWJpEpTo4qnLtTRk/s1600/spirit.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" height="176" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-gfJiQeUMPX_f8LCNxTxPWkiz2htUz9SnYaXAqdzSRZKA97S19YJbowLgkxLlS-wMM2WgDwOfCCB-JDurMM21g0lhZ0EOxnm3GSSDw-5-LrZk2MosQ3MqFJEIFxnLWJpEpTo4qnLtTRk/s1600/spirit.JPG" width="200" /></span></a><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Turning to </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">substance</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> of the debate, does "Stairway to Heaven" infringe Spirit's Taurus guitar </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">instrumental?</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> In order to infringe an original work's copyright, the </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">alleged</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> infringing work must be deemed "substantially similar" to the original work and the alleged </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">infringer</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> has to have had "access" to the original work. In this case, "access" would not appear to be an issue as Led Zeppelin and Spirit toured together in 1968 and 1969. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span>
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Below are links to YouTube clips from Spirit's "Taurus" and </span></span><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"> </span><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven." </span><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">See if you think that the opening notes in Stairway to Heaven are substantially similar to the middle guitar instrumental in Spirit's "Taurus" (e.g. starting around 0:43). Since most are </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">familiar</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> with the iconic guitar progression in "Stairway to Heaven," I present Taurus first. Please let <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> know what you think.</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="309" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/xd8AVbwB_6E" width="548"></iframe></span></span></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8pPvNqOb6RA/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8pPvNqOb6RA?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2016</span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com">sweyer@stites.com</a></span></span></span></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5455px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="font-family: "calibri" , sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-70757380233837843322015-02-02T08:45:00.000-05:002015-02-28T15:30:22.800-05:00Bitter Truth Behind the Cadbury Chocolate Import Ban<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKSeoMmd8zvHs5p9yDcLkqYL67XhESC2BwI55u7V0b1PldEcjsmOujfjPKf2YXkArWCiuYA0lgRa46cAeRFSCG72MBygMW9TegpTR013iQQ7w_jf8ZD5RtUuJcwTk5QVOkVOh8_DlUoe4/s1600/cadbury2.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKSeoMmd8zvHs5p9yDcLkqYL67XhESC2BwI55u7V0b1PldEcjsmOujfjPKf2YXkArWCiuYA0lgRa46cAeRFSCG72MBygMW9TegpTR013iQQ7w_jf8ZD5RtUuJcwTk5QVOkVOh8_DlUoe4/s1600/cadbury2.JPG" height="94" width="320" /></a></div>
United States' lovers of authentic, original British Cadbury chocolate will have to book a flight to the UK to enjoy the cherished confection. Hershey's, manufacturing licensee of Cadbury's chocolate in the U.S., uses a different recipe than the one Cadbury uses in the UK. Not surprising to many, the first ingredient to Hershey's made U.S. Cadbury chocolate is sugar, whereas milk is the first ingredient in Briton-made Cadbury. Chocolate connoisseurs say that Briton-made Cadbury chocolate tastes creamer and is smother than U.S. Cadbury chocolate made by Hershey's. These British chocolate aficionados argue that U.S. Cadbury chocolate is pure humbug.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj854HPsUifN-2qZbAKF0DGznvYiSwolp3o8PB4BI3RhiuuZaoaU1FHOqgBBtO-oAMCsGib7gCfsLKJccZMrasVt1Eum_X0Zc5PkMABe2gIcVIJaiX4XdBrSya8QNZ_t5qZIdMOwJu3bxY/s1600/hershey.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj854HPsUifN-2qZbAKF0DGznvYiSwolp3o8PB4BI3RhiuuZaoaU1FHOqgBBtO-oAMCsGib7gCfsLKJccZMrasVt1Eum_X0Zc5PkMABe2gIcVIJaiX4XdBrSya8QNZ_t5qZIdMOwJu3bxY/s1600/hershey.png" height="81" width="200" /></a>Hershey's was concerned that if Briton-made Cadbury chocolate, made with a different recipe, were imported into the U.S., Americans would be confused and mislead by two different chocolate experiences. As the U.S. trademark licensee of Cadbury, Hershey's believes that two different tasting chocolate would negatively affect its licensed intellectual property. <br />
<br />
However, as a lover of chocolate, might there not be a middle ground betwixt unrestricted Briton-made Cadbury flooding into the U.S. and a complete abolition of the milky-sweet delight? Can't we have our cake and eat it too? Options include special labeling of U.S. imported Briton-made Cadbury chocolate so that unsuspecting U.S. consumers who like their current U.S. (Hershey's made) Cadbury chocolate will not be confused with Briton-made Cadbury chocolate.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2015</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span><br />
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></a></span></div>
</div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-28220940473757289602015-01-20T08:55:00.001-05:002015-01-20T09:21:42.886-05:00Attempts to Register Intellectual Property Rights in the Slogan "JE SUIS CHARLIE" have Missed the Mark<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjf8_4A8gePLLHN4citZWLq2EzQVBrDUvjtB_mt_NiFbQ2jY-hhFVZxSf_V8dLHtc2zpCNfYaEtPxJmYw9Qmf4P20SHQPaNSdGg0DNSaopqW5d3ru2x4ZLOy4-CLYXoCT_ilnyWDRIqYNE/s1600/image001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjf8_4A8gePLLHN4citZWLq2EzQVBrDUvjtB_mt_NiFbQ2jY-hhFVZxSf_V8dLHtc2zpCNfYaEtPxJmYw9Qmf4P20SHQPaNSdGg0DNSaopqW5d3ru2x4ZLOy4-CLYXoCT_ilnyWDRIqYNE/s1600/image001.jpg" height="185" width="200" /></a></div>
At last count, over 120 trademark applications have been filed in the French trademark office for the phrase "JE SUIS CHARLIE." Included is an application by Joachim Roncin who is a graphic designer in Paris who claims that he is the true creator of the now ubiquitous phrase and the graphic design (shown to the left) of JE SUIS (white) above CHARLIE (gray) on a square black background.<br />
<br />
The French trademark office, the INPI, issued <a href="http://www.inpi.fr/fr/l-inpi/espace-presse/communiques-de-presse/detail-communique/article/marque-je-suis-charlie-5968.html?cHash=29c53578373d677cdc62bca45557f40f">a press release</a> (in French) saying that it has rejected over 50 registrations based on a "lack of distinctiveness" in the phrase. Translation: (into both English and plain non-legalese language), the phrase, "JE SUIS CHARLIE", does not qualify for trademark protection since the phrase is "too general" and not associated with (or identify) a specific origin (originator, owner) of goods or services. As reported by a colleague, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=84241277&authType=NAME_SEARCH&authToken=RPhi&locale=en_US&trk=tyah2&trkInfo=idx%3A1-1-1%2CtarId%3A1420493594751%2Ctas%3Aamy+cahi">Amy Cahill</a> of a sister publication of <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a>, <a href="http://www.trademarkologist.com/">Trademarkology</a>, in her article <a href="http://www.trademarkologist.com/2015/01/lawyers-make-good-lovers/">"Lawyers Make Good Lovers"</a>, it is not always so easy to secure trademark protection for slogans and phrases. Examples of registered trademark phrases/slogans which are associated with a good or service include "You deserve a break today" and "i'm lovin' it" both for McDonald's and "JUST DO IT" for Nike.<br />
<br />
Although JE SUIS CHARLIE may miss the mark for trademark protection, Joachim Roncin has other intellectual property protection avenues to pursue. For example, the JE SUIS CHARLIE logo (shown above) is entitled to copyright protection for the artistic expression of the layout, e.g. the white font JE SUIS over gray CHARLIE on black square background. In addition, design registration (e.g. European design registration (OHIM) and U.S. design patent protection) may be available to cover the design if applied to a specific article of manufacture or product.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2015</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></div>
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-16639578874532947462014-12-29T08:34:00.000-05:002015-02-07T20:16:48.728-05:00Second Annual top OP-IP Intellectual Property News Stories<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBMEwNQO83Jw8K_ydRe0c8DWc-tPPe31w16MwpYkASPwtMpL_GWryDLC7SnrzVxqEgZ2_1T-aG5nncUnk7jwmSwFTF1_Ia8OQwcFYHVuw6vVS0D3tzQJbrOqK_vVQ1kv2cZrv6z8mct4/s1600/sct.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBMEwNQO83Jw8K_ydRe0c8DWc-tPPe31w16MwpYkASPwtMpL_GWryDLC7SnrzVxqEgZ2_1T-aG5nncUnk7jwmSwFTF1_Ia8OQwcFYHVuw6vVS0D3tzQJbrOqK_vVQ1kv2cZrv6z8mct4/s1600/sct.jpg" height="150" width="200" /></a>'Tis the season for the mainstream media to wax nostalgically over the past year's memorable events. This past weekend, there was a reprieve from the "year in review" on at least one news outlet as <a href="https://www.facebook.com/stevemo95/posts/261975713982185">CNN went into its trademark 24-7/wall-to-wall coverage of missing jetliners</a> to report the disappearance of Asia Air Flight QZ8501. Notwithstanding this one outlier, we are once again inundated with stories of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, the Republican takeover of the U.S. Senate, the polar vortex, etc. Not to disappoint, here at <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/" style="text-align: -webkit-center;">OP-IP</a>, we too, look back on the memorable blog posts of 2014.<br />
<br />
In the tradition of Casey Casum once again enjoy the Top Ten OP-IP blog posts of 2014....<br />
<br />
10. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/12/love-on-rocks-trademark-custody-battle.html">Love on the Rocks: Trademark Custody Battle When Going Through a Corporate Divorce</a><br />
<br />
9. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/10/ip-and-innovation-are-we-heading-for.html">IP and Innovation: Are we heading for Star Trek or Star Wars as Science Fiction becomes Science Fact? </a><br />
<br />
8. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/07/gps-guidance-for-patent-eligible.html">GPS (Guidance for Patent-eligible Subject matter) to Direct the U.S. Patent Office in view of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l and the USPTO Preliminary Instructions</a><br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7gfh2A9NOP1WKILnaKVplqrYUqopCn4AQr119VNNWpIfdjgSzQTiWSTR7mdfbogySYU-2iS7ONJidHh281wQvVbHWraFLsRIKkPSc6SDkaEgjNG4gTsno8RH0PoHkMBo4tJ64OvmNw7E/s1600/iphone1.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7gfh2A9NOP1WKILnaKVplqrYUqopCn4AQr119VNNWpIfdjgSzQTiWSTR7mdfbogySYU-2iS7ONJidHh281wQvVbHWraFLsRIKkPSc6SDkaEgjNG4gTsno8RH0PoHkMBo4tJ64OvmNw7E/s1600/iphone1.JPG" height="200" width="93" /></a><br />
7. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/07/aereos-online-streaming-broadcast-tv.html">Aereo's Online Streaming Broadcast TV Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place</a><br />
<br />
6. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/01/iphone-dressed-in-blackberrys-clothing.html">iPhone "dressed" in Blackberry's clothing? The 'keys' to understanding a 'case' for trade dress infringement</a><br />
<br />
5. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/03/increasing-wave-of-secret-internet.html">Increasing wave of secret Internet communication</a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVamJ25W5U27voCp45rpFAmd0gyliZGmkGJ8dQ6qhiXMxREdl8ZFAav5ZtYXuYmNbmpEb0Itjeb7E8RDeR2mRSULE9DtVclLhEhA-zv89DJEb1fgKJAIvsEnwHsP1lse_6ePtM2D6kj0g/s1600/fig2_mason.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVamJ25W5U27voCp45rpFAmd0gyliZGmkGJ8dQ6qhiXMxREdl8ZFAav5ZtYXuYmNbmpEb0Itjeb7E8RDeR2mRSULE9DtVclLhEhA-zv89DJEb1fgKJAIvsEnwHsP1lse_6ePtM2D6kj0g/s1600/fig2_mason.JPG" height="200" width="171" /></a><br />
4. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/supreme-court-says-no-you-cannot-hear.html">Supreme Court says, "'No, You CANNOT Hear Me Now!' Let Alone Search my Cellphone Unless you get a Warrant" in RILEY v. CALIFORNIA</a><br />
<br />
3.<a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/08/patented-genetically-engineered-tobacco.html">Patented Tobacco Plant Genetically Engineered to Produce Antibodies Against Ebola gets Boost to Treat Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<hr />
2. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/10/stairway-to-copyright-infringement-step.html">“Stairway to Copyright Infringement”- Step one in Spirit's uphill climb to prove Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' infringes its copyright'</a><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="471" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/BcL---4xQYA" width="838"></iframe>
<br />
<hr />
1. <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/04/disneys-frozen-in-hot-water-over.html">Disney's "Frozen" in Hot Water Over Alleged Copyright Infringement</a>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="410" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-WdC4DaYIeQ" width="554"></iframe>
<br />
<hr />
<br />
<br />
<div>
<h2>
Happy New Year 2015!</h2>
</div>
<div>
<a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2013/12/top-ten-op-ip-blog-posts-of-2013.html"><span style="font-size: x-large;">And for those who are anxious to relive the magic of OP-IP 2013 click here to see the top posts.</span></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div align="center">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014, 2015</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969);"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></div>
</div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-40174959057971553892014-12-03T11:59:00.000-05:002014-12-03T11:59:19.349-05:00Love on the Rocks: Trademark Custody Battle When Going Through a Corporate Divorce<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2S630oS9k7q3qC9KwHTJzWt3EK-7ORmYsp4chhKIJzAM972lUV7uUcLvzDQZC8R9Wb0KCg-GwI81ylUSePBwwADQwNI5E9YvHPs3flASW_GLOCdUJA8GUNMzy6CSxTdv0zPz0mOU0_mE/s1600/photo.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2S630oS9k7q3qC9KwHTJzWt3EK-7ORmYsp4chhKIJzAM972lUV7uUcLvzDQZC8R9Wb0KCg-GwI81ylUSePBwwADQwNI5E9YvHPs3flASW_GLOCdUJA8GUNMzy6CSxTdv0zPz0mOU0_mE/s1600/photo.JPG" height="240" width="320" /></a>
<br />
Companies often own valuable intellectual property including trademarks which companies use to identify themselves and their goods and service. For example, the intellectual property rights may include the name of the business. But what happens to the trademarks including company name if a company breaks up or splits apart. For example, if a company splits in two or a partnership dissolves, who among the parties to the breakup owns the trademarks. <br />
<br />
This breakup scenario is common place among musical bands where eventual break-ups strike a familiar cord. Examples of this can be seen in the breakup or departure of members of the band Boston, Van Halen, H<span style="color: #323333;">erman’s Hermits, </span>the Animals, and New Edition to name just five.
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br />
One possible way to plan for the possible breakup is the use of an analogous tool to a prenuptial agreement prior to marriage. A partnership agreement, articles of incorporation or like instrument, signed by the principals to the business entity, can spell out who will get the rights to trademarks including business name upon dissolution of the company.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Times; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">sweyer@stites.com</span></span></span></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-81288785969895919962014-10-23T11:32:00.001-04:002014-10-23T11:46:06.313-04:00“Stairway to Copyright Infringement”- Step one in Spirit's uphill climb to prove Led Zeppelin's 'Stairway to Heaven' infringes its copyright<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhigcgKhPKKSWKjA2bkOakPyiWDI8w_5AuLWep4nJ4HOV9D9zegP9FyH5z3-J3lppx3DUJIWd_WjR3Yghh-B_sP-CJ9j3vs6cM_e9GSJ9TNci5ZUKpA8bWASO-NTRE7WFSK0NDjW0EkRgE/s1600/stairway.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhigcgKhPKKSWKjA2bkOakPyiWDI8w_5AuLWep4nJ4HOV9D9zegP9FyH5z3-J3lppx3DUJIWd_WjR3Yghh-B_sP-CJ9j3vs6cM_e9GSJ9TNci5ZUKpA8bWASO-NTRE7WFSK0NDjW0EkRgE/s1600/stairway.JPG" height="135" width="200" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Led Zeppelin is being sued by the band Spirit for copyright infringement based on Zeppelin's immortal song which Spirit alleges lifted portions from its guitar instrumental, </span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Taurus. Spirit has advanced past step one in its upward climb to prove that "Stairway to Heaven" infringes Spirit's copyright by successfully defeating Led Zeppelin's initial Motion to Dismiss the copyright infringement suit. However, Led Zeppelin has been invited to take the next step by submitting new evidence showing why a Motion to Dismiss should be granted.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-gfJiQeUMPX_f8LCNxTxPWkiz2htUz9SnYaXAqdzSRZKA97S19YJbowLgkxLlS-wMM2WgDwOfCCB-JDurMM21g0lhZ0EOxnm3GSSDw-5-LrZk2MosQ3MqFJEIFxnLWJpEpTo4qnLtTRk/s1600/spirit.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-gfJiQeUMPX_f8LCNxTxPWkiz2htUz9SnYaXAqdzSRZKA97S19YJbowLgkxLlS-wMM2WgDwOfCCB-JDurMM21g0lhZ0EOxnm3GSSDw-5-LrZk2MosQ3MqFJEIFxnLWJpEpTo4qnLtTRk/s1600/spirit.JPG" height="176" width="200" /></a><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Leaving the </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">procedural</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> issues aside, and turning now to </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">substance</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> of the debate, does "Stairway to Heaven" infringe Spirit's Taurus guitar </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">instrumental?</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> In order to infringe an original work's copyright, the </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">alleged</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> infringing work must be deemed "substantially similar" to the original work and the alleged </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">infringer</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> has to have had "access" to the original work. In this case, "access" would not appear to be an issue as Led Zeppelin and Spirit toured together in 1968 and 1969. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Below are links to YouTube clips from Spirit's "Taurus" and </span></span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"> </span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven." </span><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">See if you think that the opening notes in Stairway to Heaven are substantially similar to the middle guitar instrumental in Spirit's "Taurus" (e.g. starting around 0:43). Since most are </span><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;">familiar</span><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> with the iconic guitar progression in "Stairway to Heaven," I present Taurus first. Please let <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> know what you think.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="309" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/xd8AVbwB_6E" width="548"></iframe></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="471" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/BcL---4xQYA" width="838"></iframe></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com">sweyer@stites.com</a></span></span></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.5454540252686px;"><br /></span></span>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-33700921726933848662014-10-14T15:50:00.000-04:002014-10-14T15:50:59.263-04:00IP and Innovation: Are we heading for Star Trek or Star Wars as Science Fiction becomes Science Fact? <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="97" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:12.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3Cg-yxERXjta13dCG7rbUd9-m_5ovNzP2I_0RyQI3o-P-4zjvtzygBaZcKpp5NPLlAB0geUU5Czx986N435mEB8jPk9JY0b8GgnFtNOCVQwqkNJN8-BRwk0H4ju1c81xZeTX0qoKUU_E/s1600/IMG_0010.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3Cg-yxERXjta13dCG7rbUd9-m_5ovNzP2I_0RyQI3o-P-4zjvtzygBaZcKpp5NPLlAB0geUU5Czx986N435mEB8jPk9JY0b8GgnFtNOCVQwqkNJN8-BRwk0H4ju1c81xZeTX0qoKUU_E/s1600/IMG_0010.jpg" height="320" width="240" /></a>Technology today would have
seemed like science fiction to people fifty years ago. In fact, wireless Bluetooth earpieces, handheld smartphones and tablet computers all appear ripped from science fictions novels, movies and television programs for the 1950’s and 60’s. Recently NASA’s Ames Research Center reported its progress in creating a real-life tricorder, a device known well to Star Trek aficionados, which detects the health conditions of a patient (as well as detecting other things). While the tricorder of Star Trek only collected data and perhaps generated a diagnosis, today our “real” technology includes innovations in which human made devices are acting like humans, generating “their” own IP content. For example, the IBM supercomputer WATSON has been tasked to analyze medical databases, patient records, journal articles, etc., to identify disease conditions, create new medical diagnostic tools, and identify new therapeutic treatments.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.itechlaw.org/paris2014/program.html" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img alt="" border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizktYbSLznRFD3rb7zBpo77vBvsYNU07VkRa1RcrWXE1nssyGUJPo6df1icpCGol3bNW4QDyNCyIeHHSJf2bOnVjiEHoHibdz0U8McfQxFta-Ubk1e-KBDo5n9UQItYAAT2lemtGH3KMU/s1600/logo.png" height="92" title="http://www.itechlaw.org/paris2014/welcome.html" width="320" /></a></div>
As more and more technologies that once were science fiction are now becoming reality, we look at how IP laws can deal with futuristic technology today. While our technology continues to evolve we ask whether IP laws with their genesis in the Industrial Age are sufficient to to deal with technology of today and of the future.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
On Friday October 17, at the 2014 <a href="http://www.itechlaw.org/paris2014/program.html">ITechLaw Conference in Paris<span id="goog_321657833"></span><span id="goog_321657834"></span>,</a> Joren De Wachter and I will lead a discussion to explore these issues. We will explore:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Who or what can create Intellectual Property?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /> </span><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Can devices, software, etc., create Intellectual
Property?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If so, “who” owns the IP?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The owner of the machine? The operator of the
machine? The inventor of the machine?<br />
<span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Can/should IP rights apply to inventions or
creations made by machines?<br />
<span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->If one interacts with a computer game, and the “game”
generates IP content, who owns that content?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The gamer?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The game platform
creator?<br />
<span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Are current IP laws and associated rights and
restrictions adequate to cover emerging technologies?<br />
<span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="color: black;">What are the IP rights
/ limitations of third parties who implement technological innovations?</span></blockquote>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BulletsL1" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="97" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:12.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
After the presentation and discussion, <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP </a>will summarize the insights and remarks of the participants. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">sweyer@stites.com</span></span></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="direction: ltr; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: .38in; margin-top: 7.68pt; mso-line-break-override: restrictions; punctuation-wrap: simple; text-align: left; text-indent: -.38in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div style="direction: ltr; line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: .38in; margin-top: 7.68pt; mso-line-break-override: restrictions; punctuation-wrap: simple; text-align: left; text-indent: -.38in; unicode-bidi: embed; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 32.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-59423083586981256852014-08-11T09:28:00.000-04:002014-08-11T15:00:48.398-04:00Patented Tobacco Plant Genetically Engineered to Produce Antibodies Against Ebola gets Boost to Treat Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiO6MUkFxRsdq2JX32rOpAhNa4-bsPfJnUSmaDkEIrHqGqI7LhCbNInciaNqbzaJddO54gpqgQMpqL-Z0emhxeI8pVbYnDo97gMSQ3tKzyRg9ilpX5KhgJepvwxFzcOtlBnTDDSlL34r0/s1600/mason_2_patent.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKFRudnoFgG1tW0ib5P6dhxGsC1O9C7bGqmcPUMDIXIzY5QHXodc0_GPly7wZlftUVhK6Px7YPa5nSCI9LV95-WuuXaOE3aTsvXou8FecdF8qN2xZsHjrjmxdxe16lB78qpStipL1K_ug/s1600/mason3.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiO6MUkFxRsdq2JX32rOpAhNa4-bsPfJnUSmaDkEIrHqGqI7LhCbNInciaNqbzaJddO54gpqgQMpqL-Z0emhxeI8pVbYnDo97gMSQ3tKzyRg9ilpX5KhgJepvwxFzcOtlBnTDDSlL34r0/s1600/mason_2_patent.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiO6MUkFxRsdq2JX32rOpAhNa4-bsPfJnUSmaDkEIrHqGqI7LhCbNInciaNqbzaJddO54gpqgQMpqL-Z0emhxeI8pVbYnDo97gMSQ3tKzyRg9ilpX5KhgJepvwxFzcOtlBnTDDSlL34r0/s1600/mason_2_patent.JPG" height="320" width="279" /></a><br />
Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol, infected with Ebola, are being treated at Emory University hospital with an experimental cocktail of antibodies which target the deadly virus. But these antibodies are not just any antibodies; they were synthesized and harvested from tobacco plants that scientists genetically engineered to produce antibodies against Ebola. <br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBomiBAmsn_k795c9yR_VhY9nwQxMWHfXpCDaQMDwACk9HlDvXsxS7udpJoyT8V81SqQtUXwV3cpCkbH_F-wCKzcbqlxCd3TvJ_b0IcV8tpsUsDcJS8iqfb6A2OgA4it8zaparGOEO0ho/s1600/fig2_mason.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBomiBAmsn_k795c9yR_VhY9nwQxMWHfXpCDaQMDwACk9HlDvXsxS7udpJoyT8V81SqQtUXwV3cpCkbH_F-wCKzcbqlxCd3TvJ_b0IcV8tpsUsDcJS8iqfb6A2OgA4it8zaparGOEO0ho/s1600/fig2_mason.JPG" height="200" width="171" /></a>A team of scientists has worked for around twenty years on uses of plant-based therapeutics for the prevention and treatment of disease. In August of 2013, <a href="https://www.google.com/patents/US8513397?">U.S. Patent No. 8,513,397 ("Mason, et al.")</a> entitled, <a href="https://www.google.com/patents/US8513397?">DNA replicon system for high-level rapid production of vaccines and monoclonal antibody therapeutics in plants</a>, issued on the technology which was initially filed as a patent application in 2008. The potentially life-saving treatment remains in the experimental stages. However, the novel antibody treatment got a boost last week when Branty and Writebol became infected with Ebola. The dire conditions of Dr. Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol led to the use of the still experimental patented technology.<br />
<br />
While the treatment remains experimental and more testing is required before the cocktail of antibodies will be approved for treatment of Ebola, the tragedy of the outbreak and Brantly and Writebol becoming infected themselves has fast-tracked this treatment for Ebola and may result in similar antibody therapies to treat other infection diseases.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sources:</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.dddmag.com/news/2014/08/ebola-vaccine-antibodies-are-made-tobacco-plants?et_cid=4087879&et_rid=684652083&type=cta">Ebola Vaccine Antibodies Are Made in Tobacco Plants</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.naturalnews.com/046347_Ebola_vaccine_genetically_engineered_virus_depopulation.html">Ebola vaccine pioneer joked about use of genetically engineered virus to cull human population</a></blockquote>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;">sweyer@stites.com</span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-13865391638001624512014-07-18T09:22:00.003-04:002014-07-21T14:28:26.773-04:00Aereo's Online Streaming Broadcast TV Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqEKR3J5hWgxmxlr76iITM6kM6umpuQAxXYski7EoUE2KBavwmYtCuTl3cnb2b9C0xFLDQFxfCjdBLiSOIpEsYRqeHoG172dujyLkSH_KiXuN71eRcmfUrdyHGocLHNxeaJfUOWNuch7Y/s1600/aereo.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqEKR3J5hWgxmxlr76iITM6kM6umpuQAxXYski7EoUE2KBavwmYtCuTl3cnb2b9C0xFLDQFxfCjdBLiSOIpEsYRqeHoG172dujyLkSH_KiXuN71eRcmfUrdyHGocLHNxeaJfUOWNuch7Y/s1600/aereo.JPG" height="196" width="320" /></a>The U.S. Copyright Office has denied Aereo's request to pay compulsory licensing fees to retransmit broadcast television signals over the Internet, as cable provides pay to retransmit over coaxial cable lines. A <a href="http://www.nab.org/documents/newsRoom/pdfs/071614_Aereo_Copyright_Office_letter.pdf">denial letter</a> dated July 16, 2014 <a href="http://www.nab.org/documents/newsRoom/pdfs/071614_Aereo_Copyright_Office_letter.pdf"></a>sent to Aereo explains the U.S. Copyright's position, essentially saying that Aereo is not a cable service provider, and therefore, not eligible for paying the compulsory license (a.k.a. statutory license) to authorize it to retransmit the broadcast television programs. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCPJEdd8ztez3qxhsFOkPP4oMs1KRPIyM4fI6lCVKvPquUjYGh3xWHmKJ7WAKzef1lwx7r5ULZ2L1i8w6Q1JGnATU_3Ktg6-5I365oos-UGbEzQSm6Xwe_fCMY2moxA7pIsHIm8_dHgak/s1600/aereo2.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCPJEdd8ztez3qxhsFOkPP4oMs1KRPIyM4fI6lCVKvPquUjYGh3xWHmKJ7WAKzef1lwx7r5ULZ2L1i8w6Q1JGnATU_3Ktg6-5I365oos-UGbEzQSm6Xwe_fCMY2moxA7pIsHIm8_dHgak/s1600/aereo2.JPG" height="146" width="200" /></a>This rejection puts Aereo between a rock and a hard place. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court (<a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-461_l537.pdf"><em>ABC et al. v. Aereo</em></a>) determined that Aereo's streaming broadcast content over the Internet was a violation of the U.S. Copyright laws, in part, based on the Court finding similarities between Aereo's service and that of cable service providers. The Court reasoned that Congress intended to regulate the "type of service" that Aereo was providing, citing the compulsory licensing provisions of the U.S. Copyright Act, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">17 U.S.C. § 111</a> (<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">§111</a>) Regrettably for Aereo, the <a href="http://www.nab.org/documents/newsRoom/pdfs/071614_Aereo_Copyright_Office_letter.pdf">U.S. Copyright Office</a> does not find <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/111">§111</a> covers Internet re-transmission. Therefore, Aereo, for now, cannot pay the <span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">statutory </span>license fee to become an authorized retransmitter of broadcast television content.<br />
<br />
For a more complete discussion on <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-461_l537.pdf"><em>ABC et al. v. Aereo</em></a> <em>see...</em><br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/supreme-court-finds-aereos-emerging.html">Supreme Court finds Aereo's Emerging Online Streaming Technology Hits Copyright Infringement Bullseye;</a> and</li>
<li><a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/slings-and-aereos-of-outrageous-fortune-supreme-court-rules-that-aereo-infr/">Slings and Aereos of Outrageous Fortune: Supreme Court Rules that Aereo Infringes</a></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com">sweyer@stites.com</a></span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-13890502863614370952014-07-11T09:38:00.000-04:002014-07-31T14:22:08.241-04:00GPS (Guidance for Patent-eligible Subject matter) to Direct the U.S. Patent Office in view of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l and the USPTO Preliminary Instructions<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgP9ZSm47i8jG9VRL_Ct7iTg0yet0DsZ95hZxbKXV2BJtyXs6LjtNpoM12Q1kcnIv0RNMdSqd9Tqb3ptL3m-_2yxI0w6ZcT7tJUVg6eb9o0JFABhxCilvbWKJFIc9P6n2L3AOUc-gqqA3I/s1600/miscellaneous-old-compass-and-map-wallpaper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgP9ZSm47i8jG9VRL_Ct7iTg0yet0DsZ95hZxbKXV2BJtyXs6LjtNpoM12Q1kcnIv0RNMdSqd9Tqb3ptL3m-_2yxI0w6ZcT7tJUVg6eb9o0JFABhxCilvbWKJFIc9P6n2L3AOUc-gqqA3I/s1600/miscellaneous-old-compass-and-map-wallpaper.jpg" height="180" width="320" /></a><span style="line-height: 24px;">The U.S. Patent Office ("USPTO") has issued an APB, via a Fed. Reg. "<a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-06-30/pdf/2014-15352.pdf">Request for Comments...</a>", to assist it in its </span><span style="line-height: 24px;">unenviable task of developing new examination guidelines for its Examining Corps to guide them in evaluating patent application claims for patent-eligible subject matter </span><span style="line-height: 24px;">under </span><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/101" style="line-height: 24px;">35 U.S.C. § 101</a><span style="line-height: 24px;">.</span><span style="line-height: 24px;"> </span><span style="line-height: 24px;">The challenge for the U.S. Patent Office is to establish advice for its Examiners when many <a href="http://valawyersweekly.com/2014/06/24/high-court-ruling-leaves-open-questions-on-software-patent-eligibility/">commentators</a> believe that the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court opinion in </span><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf" style="line-height: 24px;"><i>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</i></a><span style="line-height: 24px;"> </span><span style="line-height: 24px;">failed to provide adequate instruction for one to evaluate whether a patent claim is directed to patent eligible subject matter. <i>See e.g. </i></span><a href="http://valawyersweekly.com/2014/06/24/high-court-ruling-leaves-open-questions-on-software-patent-eligibility/">High court ruling leaves open questions on software patent eligibility</a> (<a href="http://valawyersweekly.com/">Virginia Lawyers Weekly</a>, <a href="http://valawyersweekly.com/author/kimberly-atkins/">Kimberly Atkins</a>, June 24, 2014)<span style="line-height: 24px;">; and</span><span style="line-height: 24px;"> </span><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/eyewitness-prognostications-confirmed.html" style="line-height: 24px;">EYEWITNESS PROGNOSTICATIONS CONFIRMED: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Computer-Implemented Business Method & System Claims in <i>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank </i>Ineligible for Patent Protection</a><span style="line-height: 24px;">. Fulfilling our civic duty, </span><span style="line-height: 24px;">we at <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> pick up the <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-06-30/pdf/2014-15352.pdf">gauntlet</a> and provide our own <b>GPS</b> (<u style="font-weight: bold;">G</u>uidance for <u style="font-weight: bold;">P</u>atent-eligible <u style="font-weight: bold;">S</u>ubject matter) in view of </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">and the USPTO's June 25, 2014 </span><a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions</a> (in view of <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a>) </i>to provide direction to Examiners to locate patent eligible subject matter, and in particular, computer-implemented methods and systems.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<span style="line-height: 24px;"><i>Very</i> <i>Brief</i> Historical Background...</span></h3>
<br />
<div>
The <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp</a>. </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">decision extended its two-step process for evaluation patent-eligible subject matter of patent claims directed to laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas of biotechnology patents to also include computer-implemented methods and systems. </span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 24px; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in;">
<b>Step 1:</b> Is the patent claim directed to one of the three patent ineligible concepts of <u>L</u>aws of Nature, <u>N</u>atural Phenomena or an <u>A</u>bstract Idea, (“LNA”)? If no, then the patent claim does not raise a § 101 issue. If yes, then step 2.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 24px; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in;">
<b>Step 2:</b> If the claim is directed to a LNA, does the claim put meaningful limitations on the LNA and/or apply the LNA in a way that limits the LNA, e.g. does the patent claim recites a meaningful application of the LNA so that the claim is not merely the LNA performed in a computer environment, and thereby claims less than the LNA, itself?</div>
<h4>
<span style="line-height: 24px;"><b>GPS</b> </span>to Locate Patent Eligible Subject Matter (e.g. computer-implemented methods/systems)...</h4>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
<b><u>Step 1 Guidance:</u></b> (identifying if a claim is directed to LNA)</h3>
<ul>
<li>It is incumbent upon the USPTO to define "<b><u>abstract idea"</u></b> so that Examiners can faithfully do the analysis of Step 1. Although the <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">Court </span>did not deem it necessary to define "abstract<i style="line-height: 24px;">," </i>based on its conclusion that there was consensus that the claims at issue were directed to an abstract idea (stating <span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 19px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">“we need not labor to delimit the precise contours of the ‘abstract ideas’ category in this case”</a>)</span>, Examiners need guidance on how to evaluate whether claims that they examine are directed to an abstract idea. To do this, one must have a useful definition of "abstract" to apply. Mere examples of claims not patent eligible under § 101, citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent is insufficient and inadequate for guiding Examiners to determine whether a patent claim is directed to an abstract idea under the analysis of Step 1. </li>
<li><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">did not adopt the Solicitor General's definition of an abstract claim, namely “a claim that is not directed to a concrete innovation in technology, science, or the industrial arts…abstract in the sense that it is not a concrete innovation in the traditional realm of patent law”. Although <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-298_869d.pdf">Ruth Bader Ginsberg requested the Solicitor General give his definition of an abstract concept during Oral Arguments (page 53, lines 2-13)</a>, the Supreme Court has yet to adopt a definition of "abstract idea", "abstract concept" or "abstract claim."</span></li>
<li><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">did hint that </span><i style="line-height: 24px;">if</i><span style="line-height: 24px;"> a claim </span><i style="line-height: 24px;">were </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">directed to innovation in technology or improve a computer's function, the claim <i>may</i> be patent eligible under § 101. </span></li>
<li><span style="line-height: 24px;">One admonition is that a patent claim (including computer-implemented method/system) does </span><b style="line-height: 24px;"><i>not</i></b> <i style="line-height: 24px;"><b>necessarily</b></i><span style="line-height: 24px;"> have to be an improvement of another technology or improve the function of a computer, to be patent eligible under <u><span style="color: #0066cc;">§ 101</span></u>.</span></li>
<li>The dictionary definitions of "<b>abstract</b>"....</li>
</ul>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abstract"><u><b>Abstract</b></u></a> according to <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abstract">Merriam-Webster</a>...</li>
</ol>
<ul>
<li>disassociated from any specific instance;</li>
<li>expressing a quality apart from an object {the word poem is concrete, poetry is abstract}<the abstract="" concrete="" is="" poem="" poetry="" word="">; and </the></li>
<li>relating to or involving general ideas or qualities rather than specific people, objects, or actions of art: expressing ideas and emotions by using elements such as colors and lines; and without attempting to create a realistic picture.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
2. <a href="http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/abstract"><u><b>Abstract</b></u> </a>according to <a href="http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/abstract">Oxford Dictionary</a>...</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul>
<li><span class="iteration"></span><span class="definition">existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence;</span></li>
<li> n<span class="definition">ot based on a particular instance; theoretical; and</span></li>
<li> ...denoting an idea, quality, or
state rather than a concrete object: {<i><e .g.="" i="" nbsp=""><e .g.="" nbsp="" span="" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt;"><i>abstract
words like truth or equality};</i>.</e></e></i></li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<br />
<b></b><br />
<b></b><br />
<b></b><br />
<b><ul>
<li><b><i>The KEY to determining whether a patent claim is not Abstract is whether the patent claim recites a specific, concrete instance or application. Specific, concrete applications or specific instances are NOT abstract, per the definition of abstract by <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abstract" style="font-weight: normal;">Merriam-Webster</a> and <a href="http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/abstract" style="font-weight: normal;">Oxford Dictionary</a> (see above).</i></b></li>
</ul>
</b>
<br />
<u><b>Examples of Abstract ideas / Concepts and Examples of NOT Abstract Ideas</b></u><br />
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<ul>
<li>Poetry is <u>abstract</u>, a poem (a concrete example or instance) is <u>NOT abstract </u>(<a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abstract">Merriam-Webster</a>).</li>
<li>Gaming or the idea of playing games is <u>abstract</u>, but performing the concrete, discrete steps of a game, following a set of rules (i.e. a concrete example or embodiment of a specific game) is <u>NOT abstract</u> (as a poem is the non-abstract embodiment of the abstract idea/concept of a poem. (<i>see e.g.</i> <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abstract">Merriam-Webster</a>).</li>
<li>Patent claims only reciting fundamental economic principles are abstract in view of <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i>but claims reciting specific instances of a "new" financial transaction may be not abstract.</li>
<li>Other NOT abstract examples are specific embodiments and concrete, specific instances including working examples which incorporate and form an invention.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<br />
<h3>
<b style="text-decoration: underline;">Step 2 Guidance:</b> (determining whether a claim, directed to LNA, recites an application of the LNA)</h3>
<ul>
<li>Examples of applications of an LNA patent eligible under <span style="color: #0066cc;">§ 101</span> include computer code or software (operable on a computer) which is directed to improving / enhancing the function of a computer including, but not limited to...</li>
</ul>
<ol>
<li>database management</li>
<li>user interface</li>
<li>optimization of computer searching</li>
<li>updating user profiles</li>
<li>data compression,</li>
<li>biometric identification, and</li>
<li>encryption.</li>
</ol>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Other examples of applications of an LNA patent eligible under <span style="color: #0066cc;">§ 101</span> include methods or systems performing steps in a game, following a defined, claimed rule set, producing a determined claimed result, e.g. winners and losers, using the established, claimed rule set. </li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<span style="line-height: 24px;"> For more background information of the </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</a>, </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">please see our other articles:</span><br />
<ol>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/07/us-patent-examining-corps-sending.html" style="line-height: 24px;">U.S. Patent Examining Corps Sending Computer-implemented Method and System Patent Applications to Apocryphal § 101 Death Panel</a></li>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/eyewitness-prognostications-confirmed.html">EYEWITNESS PROGNOSTICATIONS CONFIRMED: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Computer-Implemented Business Method & System Claims in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Ineligible for Patent Protection</a> </li>
<li><a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/us-supreme-court-finds-computer-implemented-method-and-system-claims-direct/">US Supreme Court Finds Computer Implemented Method and System Claims Directed to “Fundamental Economic Practice” is a patent-ineligible Abstract Idea</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/eyewitness-insights-u.s.-supreme-court-on-patentability-of-computer-impleme/" style="line-height: 24px;">Eyewitness Insights on Arguments Heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Patentability of Computer Implemented Methods</a></li>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2013/12/deja-vu-all-over-again-patentablity-of.html" style="line-height: 24px;">“Déjà vu all over again…</a></li>
</ol>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></span></span></span></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-21542506872267756642014-07-03T09:04:00.000-04:002014-07-03T20:25:41.429-04:00U.S. Patent Examining Corps Sending Computer-implemented Method and System Patent Applications to Apocryphal § 101 Death Panel<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnUSyqwFaWzcJvSBlG8TXqYsumEqtQM3WkMjUka_zCzlXumxa2806UQgH2bPf4HSWaPZsAilb-ikfAMgRxup7RRrKP3CFhdGnLK9lL19k6QwQq8xR_974qGUW0p0e9AoAQfqSU8NUC5Zo/s1600/E=PA3.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnUSyqwFaWzcJvSBlG8TXqYsumEqtQM3WkMjUka_zCzlXumxa2806UQgH2bPf4HSWaPZsAilb-ikfAMgRxup7RRrKP3CFhdGnLK9lL19k6QwQq8xR_974qGUW0p0e9AoAQfqSU8NUC5Zo/s1600/E=PA3.JPG" height="142" width="400" /></a>Many U.S. Examiners (e.g. Examiners in Art Unit 3600) feel obligated to now reject computer-implemented methods and systems as failing to meet the <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/101">35 U.S.C. § 101</a> (patent eligibility subject matter requirement) in view of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf" style="line-height: 24px;"><i>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</i></a><span style="line-height: 24px;">. For example, U.S. Patent Office Art Unit 3600 has assembled a panel of examiners to review pending computer-implemented method and system patent applications to determine whether their patent claims raise patent ineligibility issues under § 101 in view of </span> <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf" style="line-height: 24px;">Alice Corp</a>. </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">Citing the </span><a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">"Preliminary Examination Instructions in view of the Supreme Court Decision in <i>Alice Corporation Ply. Ltd. v. CLS Bank</i></a><u>"</u> (hereinafter "<a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions</a>") issued June 25, 2014, many Examiners are now asserting that claims which previously would have met the subject matter patent eligibility requirements under § 101, now fail <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp</a></i>'s two-step test for patent eligibility. The Examiners' rational is that computer-implemented method claims are directed to an "abstract idea" (e.g. "organizing human activities") and the computer-implemented "abstract idea" does not improving another technology or improving the function of the computer itself. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
The two step test articulated in <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp</a></i> is:</div>
<span style="line-height: normal;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 24px; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="line-height: normal;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="line-height: normal;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 24px; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in; text-align: left;">
<b>Step 1:</b> Is the patent claim directed to one of the three patent ineligible concepts of <u>L</u>aws of Nature, <u>N</u>atural Phenomena or an <u>A</u>bstract Idea, (“LNA”)? If no, then the patent claim does not raise a § 101 issue. If yes, then step 2.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 24px; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in; text-align: left;">
<b>Step 2:</b> If the claim is directed to a LNA, does the claim put meaningful limitations on the LNA and/or apply the LNA in a way that limits the LNA, e.g. does the patent claim recites a meaningful application of the LNA so that the claim is not merely the LNA performed in a computer environment, and thereby claims less than the LNA, itself?</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Under Step 1, the <a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions</a>, provides a non-exhaustive list of "abstract ideas" including fundamental economic practices, certain methods of organizing human activities, an idea of itself, and mathematical relationships/formulas. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Under Step 2, the "<a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions"</a> provides a <u style="font-weight: bold;">non-exhaustive, non-exclusive, non-limiting</u> list of examples of how a computer-implemented "abstract idea" can be patent eligible including improving another technology, improving the function of the computer itself, and putting a meaningful limitation on the abstract idea to a particular technical environment. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Based on multiple personal examples, some Examiners feel that they must reject patent claims based on the "<a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions"</a> forcing them to find that the subject "method" (implemented via a computer) is an organizing human activity, thus satisfying Step 1, and then move on to Step 2. Under Step 2, the Examiners then assert that the "<a href="http://www.uspto.gov/patents/announce/alice_pec_25jun2014.pdf">Preliminary Instructions"</a> require the "abstract claims" to be computer-implemented to improve another technology or the function of the computer itself in order to find the claim patent eligible under § 101.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The apparent trend of the Examiners to reject computer-implemented claims as failing to meet the requirements of § 101 in view of <i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf" style="line-height: 24px;">Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">is not surprising. Post-<a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf">Bilski</a> (machine or transformation criteria is one test for patent eligibility) but Pre-<i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp</a></i>, many Examiners required some recitation of a physical computer or processor in many software and business method claims in order to find the method claims were patent eligible under §101. Essentially, Examiners would assume that a software method claim would fail Step 1, i.e. the method was abstract, a law of nature or natural phenomena. But, if the Examiners determined that the software method claim was sufficiently computer-implemented, the Examiners would allow the claim under § 101. In this way, Examiners never had to deal with determining whether the underlining software method was an "abstract idea". </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="line-height: 24px;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 24px;">Under <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf">Bilski </a>and the US Patent Office prior examination guidelines, computer implementation of a method and a computer system performing the method, in most cases, were considered patent eligible under § 101. </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp.</a> </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">has changed this calculus. Under </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corp</a>, </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">mere computer implementation of a method (e.g. software) deemed "abstract"/"an abstract idea" is not sufficient to satisfy §101. Unfortunately, </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">Alice Corps'</a>, 'I know an abstract idea when I see it' </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">analysis of a patent claim and failure to define an "abstract idea" does not provide the Examining corps much advice on a proper test to use to determine when a method is directed to an abstract idea. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="line-height: 24px;"> For more background information of the </span><i style="line-height: 24px;"><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf" style="line-height: 24px;">Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</a>, </i><span style="line-height: 24px;">please see our other articles/posts:</span><br />
<br />
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2014/06/eyewitness-prognostications-confirmed.html">EYEWITNESS PROGNOSTICATIONS CONFIRMED: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Computer-Implemented Business Method & System Claims in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Ineligible for Patent Protection</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/us-supreme-court-finds-computer-implemented-method-and-system-claims-direct/" style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 16px;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">“</span><u><span style="color: #0066cc;">Supreme Court Finds Computer Implemented Method and System Claims patent-ineligible as directed to the abstract idea of a "Fundamental Economic Practice."</span></u></a></li>
<li><span style="line-height: 24px;"> </span><a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/eyewitness-insights-u.s.-supreme-court-on-patentability-of-computer-impleme/" style="line-height: 24px;">“Eyewitness Insights on Arguments Heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Patentability of Computer Implemented Methods.”</a></li>
<li><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2013/12/deja-vu-all-over-again-patentablity-of.html" style="line-height: 24px;">OP-IP blog post, “Déjà vu all over again…</a></li>
</ol>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></span></span></span></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-60349133947417925672014-06-30T08:21:00.001-04:002014-06-30T08:38:58.797-04:00Supreme Court says, "'No, You CANNOT Hear Me Now!' Let Alone Search my Cellphone Unless you get a Warrant" in RILEY v. CALIFORNIA<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizfwd-QqHVMAoIWlVbE0kVDx4j1s0OCvJP0aLdshccNCmYP5GcabNiM-8ShYW94CE-0hzu-bUhf2h9j6_7B6QuBBItF55xSB5mA7kKRgrbLPHBAKpAfZDDjDgaAv54wPLh2JzM5wTAdpg/s1600/iphone-5s-hero-l-201311.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizfwd-QqHVMAoIWlVbE0kVDx4j1s0OCvJP0aLdshccNCmYP5GcabNiM-8ShYW94CE-0hzu-bUhf2h9j6_7B6QuBBItF55xSB5mA7kKRgrbLPHBAKpAfZDDjDgaAv54wPLh2JzM5wTAdpg/s1600/iphone-5s-hero-l-201311.png" height="200" width="146" /></a>An unanimous U.S. Supreme Court determined that police officers must get a warrant to search a suspect's cellphone, absent an exigent circumstance. The Court, taking <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-132_8l9c.pdf"><i>Riley v. Cal </i> and <i>U.S. v. Wurie</i></a> together, found that officers searches of suspects' respective cellphones, without a warrant violated the suspects' <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment">Fourth Amendment Constitutional rights against "unreasonable searches and seizures."</a><br />
<br />
I know what most regulars to <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> are thinking; what does this have to do with intellectual property law and technology and more importantly, what this guy know about criminal law and/or constitutional law? Although I may not be a criminal defense attorney or prosecutor, and I did not even stay at a <a href="http://www.ihg.com/holidayinnexpress/hotels/us/en/reservation">Holiday Inn Express</a> last night, I did take Criminal Procedure with <a href="http://www.udayton.edu/directory/law/brenner_susan.php">Susan W. Brenner</a> and Constitution Law with the legendary <a href="http://dayton-daily-news.vlex.com/vid/professor-legacy-allen-sultan-fledgling-64966477">Allen Sultan</a> (the virtual Forrest Gump of law professors) at the <a href="http://www.udayton.edu/law">University of Dayton School of Law</a>. And, I interned at the <a href="http://www.cityofdayton.org/departments/law/Pages/default.aspx">City of Dayton Prosecutor's Office</a> the summer after my first year of law school. Clearly, I am eminently qualified to speak on this topic. More importantly, based on my association with the <a href="http://itechlaw.org/">International Technology Law Association (ITechLaw)</a>, I was asked by the <a href="http://nnpa.org/">National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA)</a> (also known as the Black Press of America) to opine on these Supreme Court decisions for one of its upcoming articles. Accordingly, since I was already familiar with these cases, I decided to write about them <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
So, why did the U.S. Supreme Court determine that officers must first secure a search warrant before looking through a suspect's cellphone? The Court first acknowledged that the <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment">Fourth Amendment</a> gives us the right against unreasonable searches and seizures and emphasized that the "ultimate touchstone" of the <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment">Fourth Amendment</a> is "reasonableness" of the search. Then, the Court looked to what was being searched, namely modern cellphones, including smart phones, such as an <a href="http://store.apple.com/us/buy-iphone/iphone5s">Apple iPhone 5S</a> (shown above). The Court found that the pervasiveness of cellphone use, their immense computing power and voluminous amounts of data (including personal information) that is stored in their 16 gig up to 64 gig all weigh against the reasonableness in allowing searches without a warrant. Further, the Court recognized that many smart phones are linked to cloud storage services meaning that a search may include even more information. Taken as a whole, the Court found the warrantless search to be unreasonable.<br />
<br />
The Court dismissed the government's position for why it should not need to seek a warrant first, namely that evidence on the smart phone could be permanently lost if the smart phone's data could be remotely wiped or the locked-down. The Court address these concerns by saying that a smart phone could be preserved from remote wiping by turning the phone off or using technology to block remote wiping and lock-down wireless signals. <br />
<br />
Finally, the Court said that if there is a real concern that evidence might be lost, a warrantless search would be permitted under one of the exigent circumstance exceptions. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">sweyer@stites.com</span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-41602952662345007742014-06-26T10:09:00.000-04:002014-06-26T14:36:17.676-04:00Supreme Court finds Aereo's Emerging Online Streaming Technology Hits Copyright Infringement Bullseye<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgXsaXkRlIo5NQ4ahh9_wrbdwMoZxKw2ZrYG-6OE1MeJJqMMyOhUBwWmI4QuaxTUR1iwgeap7EsZuO5izjYHjGboyVrTkMZkI_lg2ia48LM1rcjHESrxi3IT8XuaRiCRYvqgPpvam6kGY/s1600/aereo.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgXsaXkRlIo5NQ4ahh9_wrbdwMoZxKw2ZrYG-6OE1MeJJqMMyOhUBwWmI4QuaxTUR1iwgeap7EsZuO5izjYHjGboyVrTkMZkI_lg2ia48LM1rcjHESrxi3IT8XuaRiCRYvqgPpvam6kGY/s1600/aereo.JPG" height="196" width="320" /></a></div>
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-461_l537.pdf">Aereo infringes over-the-air broadcasters'</a> copyrights through Aereo's unauthorized rebroadcast of the broadcasters' content, rejecting Aereo's argument that its ingenious technology is in full compliance with the U.S. Copyright laws (<em><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-461_l537.pdf">ABC et al. v. Aereo</a></em>). <a href="https://www.aereo.com/">Aereo's technology</a> includes individual, dime-size antennae, one for each subscriber to its service, from which Aereo streams over-the-air broadcast television programs to its subscribers. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that Aereo's streaming content (i.e. transmission) is a "public performance" in violation of the broadcasters' exclusive rights. <br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjp9-u_LYCXyuYysjAWK7dHw1frK4oywVowjUuzCwW6iAP36PP-6ou40RImO4-X7OxZeNLBDQ91ml-01_C5-TwZfIUw1y5OL0whMrCQqQ4Q0VbHTZSHvp-i_RcRu5KrBTNFIOJyLjGeMmE/s1600/aereo2.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjp9-u_LYCXyuYysjAWK7dHw1frK4oywVowjUuzCwW6iAP36PP-6ou40RImO4-X7OxZeNLBDQ91ml-01_C5-TwZfIUw1y5OL0whMrCQqQ4Q0VbHTZSHvp-i_RcRu5KrBTNFIOJyLjGeMmE/s1600/aereo2.JPG" height="146" width="200" /></a>Aereo had contented that (1) it does not control what programs are transmitted so "Aereo", itself does not "<em><strong>perform</strong></em>" anything. Further, Aereo had contented that its transmission was not a "<em><strong>public performance"</strong></em> since a single individual receives a single transmission of content, and thus, each transmission is "private" and not public. Aereo had analogized its service to a modern version of an old school rabbit ears antenna connected to a television, but instead of rabbit ears, it uses a single dime size antenna and instead of <br />
copper wires, it uses the Internet.<br />
<br />
The broadcasters contend that Aereo's service is no different than cable service providers and therefore, should be governed by the same rules that applies to them, namely, Aereo must pay licensing fees to re-broadcast the content or be subject to copyright infringement. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaNUy1XRbG4uxgVdoqAWTkOBG729jqMBSJBY3VPOYH9krqVqyy14yAlYLRIo5y1PVzeFVrW22Q5dxmIpcskeIu4x_toSPzxjQqKF_FTTYoMXSBiISpvPRPCJ726BLWl71pCG8Q763B_iE/s1600/sct.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaNUy1XRbG4uxgVdoqAWTkOBG729jqMBSJBY3VPOYH9krqVqyy14yAlYLRIo5y1PVzeFVrW22Q5dxmIpcskeIu4x_toSPzxjQqKF_FTTYoMXSBiISpvPRPCJ726BLWl71pCG8Q763B_iE/s1600/sct.jpg" height="150" width="200" /></a></div>
The Supreme Court agreed with the broadcasters and disagreed with Aereo's two contentions. Looking at the intent, purpose and history of the U.S. Copyright Act, and § 111, in particular, (provisions for compulsory licensing of community antenna television (CATV)), the Court found that "an entity that engages in actives like Aereo's <em><strong>performs</strong></em>." The Court also found that the <strong><em>performance</em></strong> was <strong><em>public, </em></strong>by not recognizing a difference between (a) multiple, single transmissions to respective individuals and (b) a single transmission to multiple individuals.<br />
<br />
For a more in-depth analysis of the <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-461_l537.pdf"> Aereo decision</a>, please see the article entitled, "<a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/slings-and-aereos-of-outrageous-fortune-supreme-court-rules-that-aereo-infr/">Slings and Aereos of Outrageous Fortune: Supreme Court Rules that Aereo Infringes</a> by <a href="http://www.stites.com/attorneys/alexandra-mackay/">Alexandra MacKay</a> and <a href="http://www.stites.com/attorneys/mari-elise-taube/">Mari-Elise Taube</a>, of <a href="http://www.stites.com/">Stites & Harbison, PLLC</a>, as well as future posts here, at <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
© <span id="goog_903128279"></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span></span></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com">sweyer@stites.com</a></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"></a></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
</a><div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
</span><div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
</span><div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
</span><div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-55429845588992939532014-06-20T12:29:00.000-04:002014-06-20T17:45:26.113-04:00EYEWITNESS PROGNOSTICATIONS CONFIRMED: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Computer-Implemented Business Method & System Claims in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Ineligible for Patent Protection<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD_gc8YH6dpl8xA5II_vb4fOcz9nbT940meMJGxfhf724xYNa6_P8pqsZeU4J6rhDp5skoLubX9w4CZ5xS29g8saBBTQI6ME4xXcwOWPRbKxB9Eo49x-ezsYi7oRScBbFKEw3gnc9FI2U/s1600/sct.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD_gc8YH6dpl8xA5II_vb4fOcz9nbT940meMJGxfhf724xYNa6_P8pqsZeU4J6rhDp5skoLubX9w4CZ5xS29g8saBBTQI6ME4xXcwOWPRbKxB9Eo49x-ezsYi7oRScBbFKEw3gnc9FI2U/s1600/sct.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 12pt;">
In an unanimous
decision, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf"><i>Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l</i></a>., finding
that the computer-implemented method and system patent claims at issue were
invalid as being directed to patent ineligible subject matter (under <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/101">35 U.S.C. § 101</a>). The basis for finding the patent claims
invalid was a determination that the claims were directed to an “abstract idea.” Regrettably, the “Supremes” sang
their same old tune and failed to define, the term, “abstract idea.” Like a broken record and like so
many recent opinions, the Supremes instead relied on the tried and true
precedent first articulated by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it">U.S. Supreme Court
Justice Potter Stewart when determining when material is obscene</a>, we know an abstract idea when we see it,
therefore “we need not labor to delimit the precise contours of the ‘abstract
ideas’ category in this case.” Interestingly
enough, the definition of an “abstract idea” was discussed during oral
arguments, but the Court refused to adopt the Solicitor General’s definition of
a claim directed to an abstract idea as “a claim that is not directed to a
concrete innovation in technology, science, or the industrial arts…abstract in
the sense that it is not a concrete innovation in the traditional realm of
patent law.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 12pt;">
While not exactly a welcomed
decision, the outcome in the case was consistent with prior U.S. Supreme Court
cases and consistent with <a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/eyewitness-insights-u.s.-supreme-court-on-patentability-of-computer-impleme/">my
first hand observations and predictions</a> after hearing the oral augments in
this case as previously reported in our article entitled, <a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/eyewitness-insights-u.s.-supreme-court-on-patentability-of-computer-impleme/">“Eyewitness
Insights on Arguments Heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Patentability of
Computer Implemented Methods.”</a> The
specific question before the Supreme Court was whether computer-implemented
inventions, including claims to computers/computer systems, software, and
processes are eligible for patent consideration. (See. e.g. <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf">footnote 2,
page 2 of the opinion</a> for a representative method claim and our prior <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2013/12/deja-vu-all-over-again-patentablity-of.html">OP-IP
blog post, “Déjà vu all over again…”</a> for a representative system
claim). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 12pt;">
In reaching its decision, the
Supreme Court extended its two-step analysis test for determining patent eligibility
of patent claims announced in the biotechnology case of <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1150.pdf">Mayo v.
Prometheus</a>. Thus, the test for
patent eligibility under § 101 for computer implemented methods, including
business methods, is the same as the test for patent eligibility of
biotechnology claims.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in;">
<b>Step
1:</b> Is the patent claim directed to one of the three patent ineligible
concepts of <u>L</u>aws of Nature, <u>N</u>atural Phenomena or an <u>A</u>bstract
Idea, (“LNA”)? If no, then the patent
claim does not raise a § 101 issue. If
yes, then step 2.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0in 0in 12pt 0.5in;">
<b>Step
2:</b> If the claim is directed to a LNA, does the claim put meaningful
limitations on the LNA and/or apply the LNA in a way that limits the LNA, e.g.
does the patent claim recites a meaningful application of the LNA so that the
claim is not merely the LNA performed in a computer environment, and thereby claims less than the LNA, itself?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 12pt;">
Like the prior U.S. Supreme Court
cases of <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf">Bilski
v. Kappos</a>, <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1150.pdf">Mayo
v. Prometheus</a> and <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf">Association
for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.</a>, we now have a fourth
example of patent claims which are not patent eligible. Regrettably, in recent years, we have not had
a case in which patent claims were held to be valid under §101. Therefore, it remains a challenge for patent
practitioners to know what the U.S. Patent Office and the courts, all the way
up to the Supreme Court, will find to be patent eligible. While each decision makes it more clear as to
what is not patent eligible, we still do not have clear vision on what patent
claims are absolutely patent eligible. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 12pt;">
In addition, since Court refused to define
the term, “abstract idea,” we do not know how to analyze a patent claim to
determine whether a patent claim is directed to an “abstract idea.” <o:p></o:p></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"> For
more in-depth legal analysis of the issues in the case and possible
ramifications, please see our article entitled, <a href="http://www.stites.com/learning-center/legal-updates/us-supreme-court-finds-computer-implemented-method-and-system-claims-direct/">“<u><span style="color: #0066cc;">Supreme Court Finds Computer Implemented Method and System Claims patent-ineligible as directed to the abstract idea of a "Fundamental Economic Practice."</span></u></a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></span></span></span></div>
Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-22680430661017812732014-06-03T10:14:00.000-04:002014-06-06T08:10:30.698-04:00Ambiguity Squared: U.S. Supreme Court finds test for Determining Patent Claim Invalidity Based on Claim Ambiguity, Ambiguous<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhihyphenhyphenwq0-MgSAsZuOXG5Q748vJb_G2U1rQbHAgpscfr578qZVq5PsRuntQ71-X2MhCQnkSpZFff_0sYLEk6CKCEoB2muZXBnoTmWmnwUFJCwAHy7EBFf2Sc_DlMB4swCriz_2Jqb4Pstqc/s1600/nat2.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhihyphenhyphenwq0-MgSAsZuOXG5Q748vJb_G2U1rQbHAgpscfr578qZVq5PsRuntQ71-X2MhCQnkSpZFff_0sYLEk6CKCEoB2muZXBnoTmWmnwUFJCwAHy7EBFf2Sc_DlMB4swCriz_2Jqb4Pstqc/s1600/nat2.JPG" height="200" width="179" /></a>Nautilus's uphill climb to avoid patent infringement may have gotten a bit easier yesterday in view of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-369_k53m.pdf"><i>Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.</i></a> The U.S. Supreme Court found that the test previously used to validate alleged infringement patent claims of Biosig, based on claim ambiguity, improper. Ironically, the reason that the Supreme Court found the previous test for patent claim invalidity (based on claim ambiguity) improper was that the test, itself, was ambiguous. The new test finds that a patent is invalid for indefiniteness if its claims, <b><i>fail to inform, with "reasonable certainty", those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention</i></b>. This opens the door for Nautilus to (again) challenge the validity of the alleged infringed patent claims under this new test. If successful, Nautilus can avoid patent infringement by invaliding the alleged infringed claims based on the patent claims being insufficiently clear (i.e.vague and indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph).<br />
<br />
<b>Summary</b><br />
In the patent suit at issue in this case, Biosig had accused Nautilus of infringing one of its patents. Nautilus responded by asserting that the alleged infringed patent claims were insufficiently clear (e.g. vague and indefinite) and thus the alleged patent claims are invalid. Although Nautilus was successful at the district court level in invalidity the patent claims, on appeal by Biosig, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and found the patent claims were not indefinite and the claims were sufficiently clear based on a test which includes determining if the claims are "amenable to construction" or "insolubly ambiguous". The U.S. Supreme Court found the Fed. Circuit's test improper.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDjstCiv4JNafvZ7IgIadhaZmf50FARBPX8kQBURvC7VcMxY8Dw3YZMEqF9jcVkWX6oawvWU0OORTihHaVLkP5uPlsTSvlDgXdb7fBrEisdSjTAIXQgxWNDOhgv45KG-gy9HxVpb_uHHU/s1600/sct.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDjstCiv4JNafvZ7IgIadhaZmf50FARBPX8kQBURvC7VcMxY8Dw3YZMEqF9jcVkWX6oawvWU0OORTihHaVLkP5uPlsTSvlDgXdb7fBrEisdSjTAIXQgxWNDOhgv45KG-gy9HxVpb_uHHU/s1600/sct.JPG" height="150" width="200" /></a>The U.S. Supreme Court's rationale for finding the test improper was that the test "tolerates some ambiguous <br />
claims but not others." As a result, the Supreme Court determined that the prior test would find some patent claims valid even though there is uncertainty as to the exact meaning of the patent claims. The Supreme Court said that this scenario is inconsistent with the statutory requirement that patent claims be sufficiently definitive to provide the public (including those skilled in the art) "reasonable certainty" of the scope of the invention. If not, the Court reasoned, the public would not have sufficient notice of the scope of a patent, and thus not have sufficient knowledge to avoid patent infringement. <br />
<br />
Unlike prior Supreme Court patent cases, the Court announced a new test for determining patent claim definiteness. The new test finds a "patent is invalid for indefiniteness if its claims, read in light of the specification delineating the patent, and the prosecution history, fail to inform, with reasonable certainty, those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention."<br />
<br />
<b>Take Home Lesson</b><br />
For patent practitioners, the take home lesson from this decision is to draft patent claims and patent specifications with sufficient disclosure to ensure patent claims are definitive and not ambiguous, so that the public, and in particular, those skilled in the art, will have "reasonable certainty" of the scope of the patent claims. In order to satisfy a balance between intentionally having broad patent claims to cover many different embodiments, the use of dependent claims directed to specific embodiments may help ensure that at least some patent claims survive an indefiniteness challenge. Further, including many different embodiments in the patent specification may provide the public with reasonable certainty of the scope of the patent claims.<br />
<br />
Finally, announcing a test is a departure from some prior U.S. Supreme Court patent cases, e.g. <i><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf">Bilski v. Kappos</a></i>. Often the Supreme Court remands patent cases back to the Federal Circuit to develop a test based on its instructions in its opinion. This may signal a change in the Court and may mean that the Court will be more active in establishing its own tests rather than relying on the Federal Circuit to develop tests, later confirmed or found invalid by the Supreme Court. Observers of the Supreme Court, including us here at <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/">OP-IP</a> anxiously await the decision in the other U.S. Supreme Court intellectual property cases this term, including patent cases, such as <i><a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/2013/12/deja-vu-all-over-again-patentablity-of.html">Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank</a>.</i><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.294118); font-size: small;"><a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></a></span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-8895601494336796362014-04-04T08:09:00.003-04:002014-08-11T14:16:30.593-04:00Disney's "Frozen" in Hot Water Over Alleged Copyright InfringementDisney has found itself in a bit of an icy situation. Last week Animator Kelly Wilson filed suit against Disney in the Northern District of California for copyright infringement. Wilson alleges that the teaser trailer of Disney's hit film <em>Frozen</em> is substantially similar, if not identical, to her short film <em>The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew">Snowman</a> </em>in plot, themes, dialogue, mood, setting, pace, characters, and sequence of events. But does this "snowman" have a leg to stand on?<br />
<br />
To make her point, the Complaint includes the following screencaps:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="410" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/PJ6c7RLV8ew" width="554"></iframe>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="410" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/-WdC4DaYIeQ" width="554"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew"><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/DvRdJAd.png" style="height: 289px; width: 501px;" /></a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdC4DaYIeQ&feature=player_embedded"><img alt="" src="http://i.imgur.com/T48uFRB.png" style="height: 291px; width: 500px;" /></a><br />
<br />
<em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew">The Snowman</a></em> was relased in 2010, and has appeared on the Internet and in animated film festivals where Pixar employees "were present and competing" in the same category. Wilson alleges that Disney had been provided copies of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew"><em>The Snowman</em> </a>prior to the creation of <em>Frozen</em> as part of various job applications with Disney. <em>The Snowman </em>tells the story of a snowman near an icy lake who becomes friends with a group of rabbits trying to eat his carrot nose. Likewise, <em>The Snowman</em> the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdC4DaYIeQ&feature=player_embedded"><em>Frozen</em> trailer</a> depicts a snowman attempting to save his carrot nose before befriending his former foe.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html">Section 501</a> of the <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/">U.S. Copyright Act</a> provides that anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of a copyright owner is liable for copyright infringement. For Disney to be found liable for copyright infringement, Wilson must prove that Disney had access to <em>The Snowman. </em>She must also prove that <em>Frozen</em> is substantially similar to the <em>The Snowman</em>. <br />
<br />
To us here at <a href="http://op-ip-law.blogspot.com/"><b>OP-IP Law Blog</b></a>, it seems like you can check "substantially similar" off the list but you be the judge:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew">The Snowman</a></em> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdC4DaYIeQ&feature=player_embedded"><em>Frozen</em> trailer</a> </blockquote>
Wilson seeks a finding of infringement and profits gained from the exploitation of <em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PJ6c7RLV8ew">The Snowman</a> </em>in addition to damages and attorneys’ fees. Disney has not yet filed its Answer, so we must wait and see whether this matter will snowball.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt;">© <a href="http://www.stites.com/attorneys/386/mari-elise-taube">Mari-Elise Taube</a> 2014<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt;">Send email feedback- <a href="mailto:sweyer@stites.com"><span style="color: blue;">mtaube@stites.com</span></a></span></span></div>
<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7443360874724823522.post-60780661248324497542014-03-17T12:51:00.001-04:002014-03-17T20:00:39.328-04:00Increasing wave of secret Internet communication<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-zzznCwboEwUm56Z14iRE_WhmXsvL5LqfN6sSM0bJU0tYa3BFiEKFkCEmdkNvJkDEv2SA1vgpe0U9UiT-i6SS5VTazRH9-sKS5R-iDOy15SHVtsOZc0AKUYSVAJAUjCavx4UyUGAC8xI/s1600/whisper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-zzznCwboEwUm56Z14iRE_WhmXsvL5LqfN6sSM0bJU0tYa3BFiEKFkCEmdkNvJkDEv2SA1vgpe0U9UiT-i6SS5VTazRH9-sKS5R-iDOy15SHVtsOZc0AKUYSVAJAUjCavx4UyUGAC8xI/s1600/whisper.jpg" height="200" width="112"></a><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">A new wave of apps are gaining popularity among young people. Facebook has lost its cach</span></span></span>é<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"> as ones parents, and horror of horrors, even grandparents, are active members with posts appearing in young people's news feeds. Twitter had became the anti-Facebook, with its short, 140 character tweets a way for young people to express themselves in short streams of </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">consciousness. Instead of personal profiles of likes, photos of life's milestone, relationships, high school and colleges, religion, hometown, residency etc., Tweeter allows one to just communicate brief ideas. </span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">However, the youth of the world finds even Twitter to be too constraining. It forces you to identify yourself. This leads to a whole host of concerns, including the need to watch what you say, and how you say it (including grammar and spelling) or suffer the scrutiny of your friends, "real" and virtual (online) ones. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/seeking-privacy-teens-turn-to-anonymous-messaging-apps/2014/02/16/1ffa583a-9362-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html">Often young people feel that they cannot be themselves and have to conform to an image that others expect to see.</a></span></span><br>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><br></span>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2SPf0EpdEWWLqZro_zDkfh4rlWymSH4G9u7H6ckQMslPCdVq9ImJG3nwVrC5W_J6VxMDntJRZCM4kKsBc9EfcpbwqHKq40Rwwa5LPIAOa_i2YnJoC_s_pBHgGBDOYzDMejyooUEUeY14/s1600/backchat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/whisper-share-express-meet/id506141837?mt=8" border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2SPf0EpdEWWLqZro_zDkfh4rlWymSH4G9u7H6ckQMslPCdVq9ImJG3nwVrC5W_J6VxMDntJRZCM4kKsBc9EfcpbwqHKq40Rwwa5LPIAOa_i2YnJoC_s_pBHgGBDOYzDMejyooUEUeY14/s1600/backchat.jpg" height="200" title="" width="112"></a><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><br></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Secret or anonymous apps such as </span><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/whisper-share-express-meet/id506141837?mt=8" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Whisper </a><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">, </span><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/secret-speak-freely/id775307543?ls=1&mt=8" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Secret </a><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">and </span><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/app/backchat-anonymous-messaging/id659951602" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Backchat</a><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"> allow users to post messages completely anonymously. Sounds innocent enough, right? Well, maybe not so fast. Truly anonymous messages could lead to defamation claims with no recourse against the defamer. True, if the alleged defamer does not identify himself or herself, it is less likely that others will believe the anonymous defamer. However, prior anonymous sources have been scrutinized when what is said is deemed to have caused harm. For example, the <a href="http://www.wtop.com/41/3538891/Anonymous-online-reviews-face-legal-test">Virginia Court of Appeals recently ruled</a> that </span></span>Yelp<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"> was recently required to turn over the name of a writer who posted a negative review of a carpet cleaner. </span><br>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><br></span>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgt894mlRbn3mjlMKwhgdjpJU5XjvDV_rlMm1E9qXHIhbaWXRWtsJo3iEXQui5HyZYtetht4UT2JFGhQ6JswWYOJBtUvpINcJ1n-gtYyulO8-YQ23WF0Gc8FByS8jzjfkCl7zKoVIbiKug/s1600/secret.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgt894mlRbn3mjlMKwhgdjpJU5XjvDV_rlMm1E9qXHIhbaWXRWtsJo3iEXQui5HyZYtetht4UT2JFGhQ6JswWYOJBtUvpINcJ1n-gtYyulO8-YQ23WF0Gc8FByS8jzjfkCl7zKoVIbiKug/s1600/secret.jpg" height="200" width="150"></a><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"><br></span>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><span style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">Here comes technology to the rescue. <a href="https://www.secret.ly/">Secret</a> enforces its terms of use and policy of maintaining civility, by removing "<a href="https://www.secret.ly/community">defamatory, offensive or mean-spirited messages against its 'community standards'."</a> Secret has </span></span><a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2455026,00.asp" style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">built-in "</a><a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2455026,00.asp" style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;">intelligence"</a><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22px;"> which identifies potentially defaming messages and warns users before the message is sent.</span><br>
<br>
<ul>
</ul>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">Other legal issues of truly anonymous messages include possible copyright and trademark infringement and divulging trade secrets. Anonymous posts could include copyrighted content, trademark material and trade secrets in which the owners of their intellectual property may have no recourse against the infringer.</span><br>
<br>
Finally, a word of caution to the "would be" "secret" messanger, the "terms and conditions" of these “anonymous” apps may
state that the app provider will turn over records and personal information if ordered
by a court or other governing body.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><br></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><br></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">© <span id="goog_903128279"></span></span><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephenweyer"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Stephen J. Weyer</span></a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> 2014</span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Send email feedback- </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><span style="color: blue;">sweyer@stites.com</span></div>
</div>
<!-- Blogger automated replacement: "https://images-blogger-opensocial.googleusercontent.com/gadgets/proxy?url=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-W8ofRIIS4AI%2FUyY7UqnPvCI%2FAAAAAAAAAHc%2FSLbjvzM_024%2Fs1600%2Fbackchat.jpg&container=blogger&gadget=a&rewriteMime=image%2F*" with "https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2SPf0EpdEWWLqZro_zDkfh4rlWymSH4G9u7H6ckQMslPCdVq9ImJG3nwVrC5W_J6VxMDntJRZCM4kKsBc9EfcpbwqHKq40Rwwa5LPIAOa_i2YnJoC_s_pBHgGBDOYzDMejyooUEUeY14/s1600/backchat.jpg" -->Stephen Weyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10205972441513421029noreply@blogger.com1