Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search

We found 1,293 results for "The Intellectual Property Strategist"...

IP News
February 28, 2008
Recent news of importance to you and your practice.
Fantasy Baseball First Amendment Rights
February 28, 2008
Recently, the right of publicity of baseball players featured prominently in a federal appellate decision. <i>C.A.C. Distribution and Marketing, Inc. v. Major League Baseball Advanced Media, L.P.</i> The Eighth Circuit concluded that the First Amendment rights to run a fantasy baseball league by using the names, performance, and biographical data of professional baseball players superseded the players' rights of publicity.
TTAB Proceeding
February 28, 2008
In a proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ('TTAB'), if your adversary is a foreign entity with no employees in the United States, can you compel an oral deposition of the entity in this country? 'No,' says the TTAB, through its Manual of Procedure ('TBMP'). 'Yes,' says the Fourth Circuit, relying on '24 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. '24 in <i>Rosenruist-Gestao E Servicos LDA v. Virgin Enterprises Ltd.</i>, 511 F.3d 437 (4th Cir. 2007).
Protection from Unwanted Flattery
February 28, 2008
For the last several sessions, Congress has considered the Design Piracy Prohibition Act, which would expand copyright protection to include the cut and look of fashion designs. This proposed legislation could make many imitative designs illegal and add to the current, although somewhat limited, protections for fashion available under existing U.S. trademark, patent, and copyright laws. This article discusses these currently available protections, provides suggestions for designers for utilizing them, and examines changes to the Copyright Act proposed by the Design Piracy Prohibition Act.
IP News
January 31, 2008
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Incorporating a Disclosure Made Difficult: Zenon Environmental, Inc. v. United States Filter Corp.
January 31, 2008
Incorporating a disclosure from an earlier document by reference would not appear to be a difficult task, but a recent decision from the Federal Circuit suggests otherwise.
Famous Marks Doctrine: A Defeat in New York State
January 31, 2008
In <i>ITC Limited v. Punchgini, et al.,</i> the New York Court of Appeals declined to recognize the 'famous marks' doctrine, but it did confirm the possibility of protection under existing common law theories of misappropriation in certain limited circumstances.
Bone of Fido Parody: <i>Louis Vuitton v. Chewy Vuiton</i>
January 31, 2008
A biting satire it may not have been, but <i>Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC</i> nonetheless concluded that canine chew toys fashioned after Louis Vuitton handbags were a permitted parody that did not infringe or dilute Louis Vuitton's admittedly well-known marks. Although the decision scratches little new ground in the trademark jurisprudence of parody and infringement, it was a first opportunity for an appellate court to assess parody under the new Trademark Dilution Revision Act.
IP News
December 27, 2007
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Earmarks and Trademarks Collide: Fourth Circuit Reverses District Court in The Last Best Beef, LLC v. Jonathan W. Dudas et al.
December 27, 2007
'Earmark' is a 16th century form of cattle branding. But this case presents a contemporary Congressional earmark that cut out the right of Last Best Beef, LLC to register or enforce its brand.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Internet Goods and Product Liability
    The Internet's value arises in part from its ability to provide images, data and content quickly and at little cost. This ability results from the fact that Internet products — whether they be images, data or content — are each reduced to a digital format. Sharing products that have been so reduced may result in product liability.
    Read More ›
  • Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards Bodies
    Chances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations &mdash; keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization &mdash; such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.
    Read More ›