Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In recent years, one of the most important and controversial developments in U.S. patent law relates to the standard for whether an invention is “patent eligible,” or in other words, whether an invention falls within the scope of subject matter that is capable of being patented. Through the late 1990s and into the 2000s, for most kinds of patents, patent eligibility was not really a concern for patent holders. Certainly, as exemplified first by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision in State Street Bank & Trust v. Signature Financial Group, 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998), and later the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010), the patent eligibility of business method patents and software was an issue both in the prosecution and enforcement of patents. However, widespread uncertainty about and ultimate decimation of issued patents was nothing compared to what we have seen in the last five years since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), which was the culmination of a series of decisions after Bilski, including Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, 566 U.S. 66 (2012), and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, 569 U.S. 576 (2013).
By Stacey C. Kalamaras
This summer, the Madrid System turned 30 years old, and as two more countries prepare to join the Madrid Protocol we look at how the Madrid System has grown as it enters full adulthood.
By Nicole D. Galli
Now that we are in the digital age, questions have been raised about the trade dress of websites and apps.
By Aaron Davidson
A look at the gray area of infringement of U.S. patents in the U.S., but with related consequences or actions outside the U.S.
By Howard Shire and Christine Weller
Penn State Files Trademark Lawsuit against Sports Beer Brewing Company
Can OSU Trademark the Word “The”?