Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This month marks the beginning of a new feature in which <i>Patent Strategy & Management</i> expands its coverage to provide information about the advancement of lawyers in the patent profession.
Part One of this series discussed reasonable royalty damages and the questions that a prospective litigant can ask to evaluate its litigation exposure. This month's installment continues the discussion of those questions.
In patent infringement cases, defining the scope of the real injury to the patentee poses a challenge when the patent only covers a portion of a product or system. Courts have developed the entire market value and convoyed sales rules in an attempt to address the true economic loss to the patentee caused when the patented invention is part of a more complex product or of a larger system of goods sold together. These doctrines have been criticized for a number of years and are the targets of legislative activity.
Features
Since 1842, U.S. law has required patent owners to provide notice of their patent rights to the public by marking patented articles. The current statute, codified at 35 U.S.C. '287(a), provides that a failure to mark bars a patentee from obtaining damages for the period before it provided a defendant in a patent infringement action with actual notice of its infringement allegations. This can have a significant financial impact, as up to six years of potential damages may be lost.
In a nutshell, the value of a firm or business is equal to not only the inherent value of its IP but also the value added from the successful branding of a company's intangible assets. This article presents four key steps, with a focus on patents and trademarks, toward adding an IP branding strategy to an existing business model.
Features
Despite no seeming fundamental economic differences, there have been occasions where divorce courts in different states have reached different conclusions of value for the same type of business. These states reach such different conclusions as to what constitutes marital property because they have different views as to the meaning of the term 'value.' This article represents a summary of some of our findings concerning the application of the premises and standards of value in divorce matters.
Features
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
The first federal case to consider directly the intersection of copyright and trade dress rights arose from a dispute over the use of revealing photographs of a young Marilyn Monroe on labels of red wine. The case, <i>Nova Wines, Inc. d/b/a/ Marilyn Wines v. Adler Fels Winery LLC</i>, out of the Northern District of California, was decided on a preliminary injunction motion and involved two commercial wine merchants intent on capitalizing on Monroe's enduring marketability.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.