Follow Us
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the recent U.S. Supreme Court case of USPTO v. Booking.com, No. 19-46 (June 30, 2020), the Court held that the term Booking.com is not necessarily generic merely because it is composed of two components, each itself generic. In so deciding, Justice Ginsburg averred that there is an appropriate metric to determine if such a term is indeed generic, that of consumer perception. The Court cited the Lanham Act’s provision on cancellation that states: the “primary significance of the registered mark to the relevant public … shall be the test for determining whether the registered mark has become the generic name of goods or services.”
*May exclude premium content
The World of NFTs and Their Implications In Intellectual Property Law
By Christine K. Au-Yeung
NFTs have been all the rage in the world. So what exactly are NFTs, and how do they reconcile with the basic tenets of intellectual property law?
Supreme Court Leaves As Many Questions As It Answers In 'Google v. Oracle'
By Shaleen Patel
The Court cleared Google of copyright infringement in terminating a 16-year long dispute as to whether Google’s Android mobile platform had infringed Oracle’s Java programming language’s copyright. However, the Court did not answer the question of whether specific components of computer software qualifies for copyright protection at all.
By Chidera Anyanwu and Chloe Delehanty
In some instances the appearance of third-party intellectual property on items purchased, owned and customized by the purchaser may be legal under the doctrines of first sale and fair use.
By Jeffrey Ginsberg and Matthew Weiss
Federal Circuit: The Doctrine of Equivalents Is Not a Binary Choice
Federal Circuit: No Estoppel for Party That Joined IPR
Copyright © ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
