Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal courts have long disagreed over whether the unauthorized “making available” of a plaintiff’s works to the public is sufficient to constitute copyright infringement under the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §106(3). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit holds the view that actual distribution of the works is required. See, e.g., Perfect 10 Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc., 487 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2007). The Fourth Circuit, on the other hand, has taken the position that for purposes of an infringement analysis, a library, for example, distributes a work when it “holds a copy in its collection, lists the copy in its card file, and makes the copy available to the public.” Hotaling v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 118 F.3d 199 (4th Cir. 1997).
*May exclude premium content
By David H. Bernstein and Jared I. Kagan
In the first case in U.S. Supreme Court history argued by telephone, the Court ruled 8-1 in favor of Booking.com, holding that it could register as a trademark its eponymous domain name BOOKING.COM.
By Jason Bloom
The Supreme Court decided two copyright cases this term, both involving states. This article discusses the cases and their likely impact on copyright law going forward.
By Rene Befurt, Marie Warchol and Anthony Nasr
As consumer surveys become increasingly common forms of evidence in matters involving copyright, patent or trademark infringement, so too do Daubert challenges that attempt to disqualify that evidence. However, getting admitted into court is no guarantee of success — you are not over the entire Daubert hurdle just yet. The next step is ensuring that your survey is convincing the fact finders that your survey’s results are dependable and useful.
By Howard Shire and Shaleen Patel
Federal Circuit: Faulty Claim Construction Does Not End Patentability Determination
Federal Circuit: Notice to Market Bio Product Not Negated By New Applications