Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For years, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office or USPTO) allowed claims to biological discoveries including DNA or protein sequences as long as the claims did not encompass the sequences in their natural setting. In Mayo and Myriad, the U.S. Supreme Court wiped out most of those patents for improperly claiming a “law of nature” and “product of nature,” respectively. Since that time, the Federal Circuit has expanded the holdings and invalidated more patents directed to biological discoveries. If the newly discovered correlations and properties of what is found in nature cannot be patented, what strategies for protection are left for companies doing biological research?
By Kyle-Beth Hilfer
Two recent circuit court cases clarified copyright infringement of photographs on the Internet. Both cases serve as cautionary tales for those who takes photographs for their websites from the Internet without investigating copyright rights.
By Scott Graham
Stanford Law School made available to the public a database of every patent lawsuit that’s been filed since 2007.
By Howard Shire and Christine Weller
Mercedes Benz USA LLC v. Bombardier
By Erin Hennessy, Annie Allison and Logan Kotler
Copyright, Fortnite and the Ability to Protect How You Shake Your Groove Thing
The U.S. Supreme Court just crashed the copyright world’s latest dance party — stepping on the toes of a soiree of copyright infringement lawsuits against videogame developer Epic Games, the creator of Fortnite.