Features

Weighing the Benefits: How Much Weight Will Your Survey Have in Court?
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.
Features

Recent Court Views on "Making Available" Controversy in Copyright Infringement
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. Two June District Court decisions demonstrated the differences between the views of the Fourth and Ninth Circuits.
Features

Statute of Limitations In Copyright Ownership Disputes: Questions from the Everly Brothers Case
Don and Phil Everly's flawless harmonies that resulted in a string of hits in the 1950s and '60s regrettably ended in acrimony. The Sixth Circuit recently issued a decision in a dispute between Phil's heirs and Don over copyright ownership of the No. 1 hit "Cathy's Clown," in which concurring Judge Eric E. Murphy raised important questions about when the statute of limitations should begin to run in copyright cases and whether courts have been correctly applying the law.
Features

Commentary: Claims Filing Time Issues on Copyright Ownership from Everly Bros. Case
Don and Phil Everly's flawless harmonies that resulted in a string of hits in the 1950s and '60s regrettably ended in acrimony. The Sixth Circuit recently issued a decision in a dispute between Phil's heirs and Don over copyright ownership of the No. 1 hit "Cathy's Clown," in which concurring Judge Eric E. Murphy raised important questions about when the statute of limitations should begin to run in copyright cases and whether courts have been correctly applying the law.
Features

Recent Court Views on "Making Available" Controversy In Copyright Infringement
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. Two June District Court decisions demonstrated the differences between the views of the Fourth and Ninth Circuits.
Features

Defense Counsel Discuss Outcome in Dance Steps Case
Kirkland & Ellis has notched a win in cutting-edge litigation that questions the protectability of dance steps, what constitutes choreography and the relationship between copyright, and right of publicity and trademark law.
Features

Federal Appeals Courts Weight in On Accruals for Copyright Infringement vs. Ownership Claims
The U.S. Copyright Act states that a civil copyright action must be filed within three years of its accrual. How this applies to copyright infringement and to copyright ownership claims, including in the same case, isn't always clear. But two recent federal appeals courts decisions have provided guidance on the differences in accrual for each of these copyright claims.
Features

9th Circuit Says Copyright Attorney Fees Available in Declaratory Suits
A declaratory judgment action for copyright abandonment can give rise to fee shifting under the Copyright Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in a case of first impression.
Features

Artificial Intelligence and Copyright: Ownership and Fair Use
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.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Article III Inter Partes Review Decision Precluded By Congress, SCOTUS Rules SDNY: Video Game Makers Not Violating Copyright with NBA Player Tattoos
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis 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.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith 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.Read More ›
- The Article 8 Opt InThe 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.Read More ›
- Removing Restrictive Covenants In New YorkIn Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?Read More ›
- The Stranger to the Deed RuleIn 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.Read More ›