The firestorm of publicity regarding clients pushing back and refusing to pay for certain fees, and especially soft costs, begs the question: Is the traditional cost recovery model dying or perhaps already dead? The answer is no.
Overly aggressive enforcement of trademark rights by high-profile brand owners can lead to consumer backlash when such enforcement is perceived as "trademark bullying" of the "little guy." Such enforcement efforts have grown increasingly hazardous during the era of Internet blogging and social networking.
The Seventh Circuit has now adopted the conflicting view that ' 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code does not affect trademark licenses in one way or another and that <i>Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.</i> was incorrectly decided.
In a closely followed case involving the patentability of DNA sequences of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which account for most forms of inherited breast and ovarian cancer, the Federal Circuit largely followed its prior 2011 ruling and again held that isolated DNA sequences are patent-eligible subject matter.
Google Inc. has given up the fight in a closely-watched case accusing the company of infringing trademarks and facilitating the sale of counterfeit goods.
Dear Readers:<p>Due to the power outage caused by Hurricane Sandy, publication of <i>The Intellectual Property Strategist</i> was delayed. LJN regrets any inconvenience this may have caused.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.
The doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.
