Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Legal professionals everywhere now know that new data protection rules went into effect on May 25 across Europe, changing how organizations treat personal data. This was the first overhaul since the EU’s Data Protection Directive in 1995, shortly after the EU was established. Ostensibly, GDPR’s mission is to strengthen and unify the EU’s protection of online privacy rights and promote data protection for citizens of the 28 countries currently in the EU. In the global economy, however, GDPR serves as an alarm to all countries with business flowing across Europe and well beyond. Where business flows, data follow.
*May exclude premium content
By Sarah Benowich
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc.
The Supreme Court, settling a circuit split, held that, although highly important, willfulness is not a prerequisite for a trademark infringement plaintiff to obtain a profits award.
By Anthony J. Dreyer
On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, finding that any preclusion of litigation defenses must comply with traditional res judicata principles, and ruling that Lucky Brand was not precluded from asserting its defenses in its long-standing trademark litigation against Marcel Fashions Group
By Shaleen J. Patel and Sushmitha Rajeevan
Machine learning allows certain AI to create entirely new content based upon the materials it used to learn. In the process of creating new content, AI may create copies of copyrighted works in memory storage as a byproduct of its overall output sequence. This article explores authorship and ownership of such AI-generated content, and to what extent, if any, can copyrights be infringed upon when AI reproduces copyrighted works for machine learning.
By Rudy Kim and Chris Han
Holding that the parties’ executed agreement mooted the issues in the case, the Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment of non-infringement despite the parties’ agreement. The decision builds upon prior Federal Circuit case law giving effect to settlement agreements.