Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Supreme Court on June 9 breathed new life into the doctrine of patent exhaustion — thereby limiting the power of patent-holders over “downstream” transactions.
In a unanimous ruling authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court stood firm behind the 150-year-old doctrine under which “the sale of a patented item terminates all patent rights to that item.” In other words, the patent holder has little or no power to restrict what the purchaser does with the patented items after the first sale.
The ruling came in the case of Quanta Computer v. LG Electronics. The dispute arose over efforts to control what purchasers of Intel Corp. components did with those parts. The Korean company LG had licensed to Intel a series of patents on computer-related methods for use with Intel microprocessors and chipsets. Intel agreed to inform its customers that the LG licenses do not extend to any combination of Intel parts with non-Intel parts. Nonetheless Quanta, a Taiwan-based computer maker that bought Intel parts, combined them with non-Intel parts in ways that exercised the LG patents. LG sued Quanta for patent infringement.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.