Features
Decision of Note: <b>Copyright Law Preempts Claims Against Kid Rock</b>
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the majority of state law claims against Kid Rock over music contracts the artist signed early in his career were preempted by federal copyright law.
Features
Arbitration Update
Recent rulings affecting arbitration provisions and hearings in the entertainment industry.
Fifth Circuit Rules in Battle Over Rap Phrase
As often happens in the hip-hop world, two rappers became embroiled in a dispute over who owned the rights to a song that utilized a popular phrase. And it took the musical ear of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to settle the matter.
Features
<b>Counsel Concerns</b>Music Publisher's Defense Counsel To Stay in Case
The Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Four acknowledged that an entire firm can be disqualified when one of its attorneys formerly represented and may possess confidential information harmful to a former client who is now an adverse party in litigation. But the court of appeal emphasized that this wasn't so if "there was no opportunity for confidential information to be divulged."
Features
Clause & Effect
TV Program Hosts/Sales And Assignment Clauses <br>Film Option Agreements/Profit Participation Rights
Features
Raising the Stakes in Copyright Litigation: The Availability of Punitive Damages
Many practitioners likely assume that the sole monetary remedies under the Copyright Act are those specified in Sec, 504 of the statute, namely the copyright owner's provable losses and/or the infringer's profits, or, alternatively, statutory damages (which, by statutory formula, include possible stepped-up awards in cases of willful infringement). It was thus with some significance, and perhaps surprise, that in <i>Blanch v. Koons</i>, a slender decision of only seven paragraphs, a federal district judge in New York rendered a decision that granted a motion to amend the complaint in a copyright case to allow the plaintiff to seek punitive damages (not simply enhanced statutory damages).
Features
Myths About Avoiding Prosecution History Estoppel
In the recent Federal Circuit case <i>Honeywell, Int'l. Inc. v. Hamilton Sundstrand Corp.</i>, 370 F.3d 1131 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (en banc), the court held that a presumption of prosecution history estoppel arises when a patent applicant cancels an independent claim and rewrites its first dependent claim in independent form. Since then, patent attorneys and industry watchdogs have repeatedly misinterpreted the cause of this estoppel. Worse, many have advocated the dangerous strategy of initially writing dependent claims in independent form as a means of avoiding the estoppel. Such a strategy is useless in avoiding estoppel and highly counterproductive. Patent prosecutors should leave dependent claims in dependent form and, instead, avoid estoppel by using the strategies suggested below.
Features
Calculation of Lost Profits Damages in Patent Cases
Upon a finding of patent infringement, a court is to award the patentee "damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court." 35 U.S.C. '284. In most cases, the patentee will be entitled to a larger damage award if it can recover damages based on lost profits. Lost profits are not, however, available in all cases. This two-part article will review the current state of the law governing the availability of lost profits damages in patent infringement cases in the first part and the calculation of these damages based on diverted sales in the second part.
Features
Recovery of Damages for Use of the Invention Claimed in a Published Patent Application
For about 200 years, the United States kept all patent applications confidential prior to issuance of a patent. Sabra Chartrand, <i>A New Law Removes Some Secrecy From the Applications</i>, N.Y. Times, Dec. 4, 2000, at C6. However, as the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") noted, secrecy eventually gave way to global harmonization. <i>Id.</i> Under the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 ("AIPA"), patent applications are published by the USPTO 18 months after the earliest claimed filing date. 35 U.S.C. '122(b) (2004). This change in U.S. patent practice presented a risk that a patent applicant's invention, once publicly disclosed, would be vulnerable to unrestrained use until the patent, with its associated intellectual property protections, actually issued. To address the vulnerabilities of a patent applicant prior to issuance of a patent, Congress enacted the Provisional Rights subsection as part of the AIPA.
When a UK Franchise Termination Struck Back
On Nov. 16, 2004, Justice Richards of the Chancery Division of the High Court in England handed down judgment in <i>(1) Total Spares & Supplies Limited (2) Antares Ltd v. (1) Antares SRL (2) European Plumb Direct Ltd,</i> 16 November 2004 EWHC 2626 (Ch). It is rare that a franchise dispute proceeds to trial in England, and this case is a reminder of the dangers associated with terminating a franchise agreement.
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
- Law Firms and the Rise of HospitalityThe law firm office cannot remain unchanged, as if frozen in time set to some date prior to the onset of pandemic, when the terms and meaning have all changed. In fact, the office must now provide benefits or an experience the lawyers and staff cannot get at home.Read More ›
- Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- Lack of Logo Placement At Center of Ruling Over Meat Loaf Album PackagingTo build visibility for its brand, a record label or production company will want its logo included on products containing its master recordings manufactured and distributed by third parties. This will be addressed in the agreement between the label or production company and manufacturer/distributor. The failure to include the logo may raise a host of issues, from the breadth of the logo-placement obligation ' such as whether it includes Internet downloads ' to the proper theory on which to base any damages and just which album-sales figures are subject to evidentiary discovery. A recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ' in a long-running dispute between Cleveland International Records and Sony Music Entertainment ' illustrated how these issues may be argued and decided.Read More ›