In recent years, the International Trade Commission ('ITC') has become an increasingly popular venue for parties seeking to enforce patent rights. There are several reasons for this trend. First, the ITC is a high-speed venue. The ITC's investigation of a patentee's allegations of infringement is typically completed within 12 to 15 months, far more quickly than cases in most U.S. district courts. Second, the ITC offers a powerful remedy: exclusion of infringing products from the United States. The U.S. Customs Service enforces the exclusion order. Of course, this remedy is available only when the infringing products are being imported. However, there are many industries in which most, if not all, manufacturing takes place overseas. As a result, resort to the ITC is often available even with respect to domestic competitors. Third, although the ITC does not award damages, the patentee has the option of seeking damages in a parallel case in federal district court. Thus, the patentee can obtain both damages and an exclusion order by pursuing relief before the ITC and a district court.
- March 30, 2006Julie Holloway
Copyright Infringement/Statute of Limitations The U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Southwestern Division, held that a pro se suit against musical artist Michael Jackson and producer Quincy Jones was barred by the 3-year statute of limitations of Sec. 107(b) of the Copyright Act. Gleeson v. Jackson, 1-05-cv-88. Plaintiff George Gleeson claimed copyright infringement of songs and the 'moonwalk' dance that Jackson popularized. But the district court noted: '[I]t is undisputed that the plaintiff,…
March 29, 2006Stan SoocherThe New York Appellate Division, Fourth Department, granted dismissal of claims against NBC and Jay Leno over use without the plaintiff's permission of her photograph in the humorous headlines segment of 'The Tonight Show.'
March 29, 2006ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recently filed cases in entertainment law, straight from the steps of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
March 29, 2006ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The latest information you need to know.
March 29, 2006ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Legal Services After Bankruptcy Post-Petition Filed
Malicious ProsecutionMarch 29, 2006ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |In a typical corporate merger or acquisition, the associated intellectual assets exhibit several concurrent financial behaviors. On the balance sheet, intellectual assets behave like financial derivatives. On the asset side of the balance sheet, an intellectual asset creates the opportunity but not the obligation for an owner to capture above-average 'rents' from the sale of patented and/or branded goods and services ' a call option. An intellectual asset also creates the opportunity but not the obligation for an owner to assert patent rights against someone else, even if the owner is not using the rights otherwise ' a put option. On the liability side of the balance sheet, an intellectual asset holder may find himself targeted as a defendant where a host of incurred but not reported ('IBNR') historic events comprise a Pandora's box of expensive 'issues.' Hence, intellectual assets by their nature tend to generate volatile returns if the owner does not fully appreciate and manage associated risks.
March 29, 2006Nir Kossovsky, M.D., Robert J. Block, and James M. Singer