Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It's 12 O'Clock: Do You Know Where Your Data Are? IP Protections for Databases
An economist once said that the reason talk is so cheap is because the supply generally exceeds demand. Not so with information. No matter how much is produced, people always seem to want more. And more information means more databases, and the amount of work involved in compiling and organizing information into databases can be staggering. Yet, in many cases, anyone can copy the stored data and essentially replicate all or a portion of the database at a mere fraction of the cost of creating the database in the first place. Some have argued that this freedom to copy acts as a disincentive for anyone to organize information into databases. After all, if the creator can't expect to reap a fair economic reward for the effort expended, why bother?
Patchwork U.S. Protection Scheme
Various aspects of databases can be protected under existing intellectual property regimes. Patents can be used to protect the ideas that underlie new and useful ways of storing, searching for, and retrieving information from a database. For example, Google has several patent applications pending for its successful technology. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No., 6,678,681, “Information Extraction From a Database.” Copyright law affords protection for creative expression, such as creative material stored in a database and unique ways of compiling the stored information. But that's more or less where protection for databases afforded by existing law stops. Even though they can be costly to compile, databases often are compilations of facts, which cannot be patented or copyrighted, and often employ existing tools and methods that likewise cannot be protected. In other words, the database owner cannot rely on existing patent and copyright law to prevent the reproduction of much of the information and functionality contained in a database.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.