In today's Internet age, the most valuable asset belonging to many of the world's most successful organizations is "source code" — the programming underlying all software operating systems, databases, and applications. As a result, keeping source code from leaking to the public is of paramount concern, especially in light of the fact that source code published over the Internet can proliferate at an exponential pace with little more than a series of mouse clicks. If confidential code is released into the public domain, even inadvertently, it risks losing any trade secret protection it once enjoyed. See, e.g., Linkco, Inc. v. Fujitsu Ltd., 230 F. Supp. 2d 492, 498-99 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). In short, once the "genie" is out of the bottle, it cannot be put back in.
- August 09, 2004Douglas E. Lumish and Matthew M. Sarboraria
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news and cases from around the country.
August 09, 2004Compiled by Jeffrey S. GinsbergIn late June 2004, the European Community acceded to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Madrid Protocol on the international registration of trademarks. This development is likely to have a long-standing effect for U.S. trademark owners who wish to obtain trademark protection in the European Community. Indeed, since the inception of the European Community Trademark (CTM) system, U.S. applicants have positioned themselves as leaders in filing new CTM applications. According to recent statistics of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM), U.S. trademark owners filed approximately 90,000 CTM applications, which constitutes close to 25% of all applications filed. For comparison, the second and third places taken by Germany and the United Kingdom, with 62,000 and 47,000 applications, respectively, are markedly behind the United States in CTM filings.
August 09, 2004Max VernWhat exactly does it mean to interpret claims "in light" of the specification? Do the descriptions and examples in a patent specification affect the interpretation of the patent's claims where there is no express statement that a specialized definition is being given to claim terms? Absent a specific glossary section, is it even necessary to read the specification or should the public be free to read and interpret the claims in a vacuum? Within 4 days, two separate panels of the Federal Circuit delivered seemingly conflicting answers to these questions, highlighting a growing rift regarding the significance of the specification and prosecution history to claim interpretation.
August 09, 2004Matthew W. Siegal and Alfi S. GuindiMost find it to be a nuisance. Advertisers consider it to be cutting edge. Either way, spyware (or adware) is receiving a lot of attention recently in the press, in the courts and in legislatures around the country.
August 09, 2004Erin S. HennessyeBay Inc.'s savvy user agreement protects it from liability for defamatory postings on its Web site, an appeals court has ruled. But the court's decision left vulnerable other online content providers.
August 09, 2004Brenda SandburgCanada Rejects Music Royalty Plan for Internet Canada's Supreme Court recently struck a blow to the music industry in ruling that Internet Service Providers…
August 09, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Web search giant Google Inc. recently admitted that it may have illegally issued as much as $3.1 billion in shares after its planned initial public offering (IPO), and offered to buy them back at a significant discount.
August 09, 2004ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drugmaker, recently announced that it is suing dozens of online pharmacies allegedly selling counterfeit versions of the erectile dysfunction drug Viagra, and its cholesterol-lowering flagship drug Lipitor.
August 09, 2004Samuel FinemanNearly 2 years have passed since the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Specht v. Netscape Comm. Corp. threw what some thought was a large monkey wrench into online contract formation. The practical effect of the decision, however, has not been as significant as had been feared, and businesses operating in cyberspace continue to successfully reach online agreements with end users and customers.
As a close reading of the Specht ruling and other decisions make clear, "clickwrap" and other online agreements that meet certain basic requirements for contract formation are, indeed, enforceable.August 09, 2004Shari Claire Lewis