Patent lawyers started breathing again on Oct. 31, as the specter of new patent rules was chased away ' at least for a little while ' by a Virginia court. U.S. District Judge James Cacheris granted pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline's motion for a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office from implementing rules set to go into effect on Nov. 1.
Patent lawyers started breathing again on Oct. 31, as the specter of new patent rules was chased away ' at least for a little while ' by a Virginia court. U.S. District Judge James Cacheris granted pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline's motion for a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office from implementing rules set to go into effect on Nov. 1.
Some of the law firms mentioned in this issue have provided Marketing the Law Firm with marketing materials for consideration for inclusion in the MLF 50. There is no connection to any editorial contributions from the firms and the commentary is solely that of the author, who does not receive any compensation from the firms mentioned.
This 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.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 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.
