When Atlanta filmmaker-turned-plaintiff Raymond Pirtle Jr. filed a copyright infringement suit against CA-based Netflix in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, he pitted him against seasoned attorneys, representing a corporate giant in a case that has both sides claiming early incremental victories.
Johansson alleges that, in order to generate new subscribers for Disney+, Disney intentionally interfered with her talent agreement with Disney affiliate Marvel Studios for her featured role in Black Widow — and thus allegedly induced Marvel to breach a promise in the Johansson/Marvel agreement for the film to be initially distributed in exclusive "wide theatrical release." Updated Oct. 1 to reflect a confidential settlement reached in the case.
The gold in the gold rush in tech M&A is talent to develop and integrate artificial intelligence technology. Faced with a shortage in skilled employees, buyers are using "acquihires," a discreet M&A strategy that oftentimes flies under the news radar, to bolster AI benches.
The federal judge who presided over the antitrust showdown between Fortnite developer Epic Games Inc. and Apple Inc. found that Epic failed to prove the tech giant is a monopolist, but ordered Apple to allow certain in-app purchasing communications.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling that its judges said could have come straight out of a telenovela, or Spanish soap opera.
The 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.
With 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.
The owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.
The doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.
