IP News
March 01, 2006
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
The Dismantling of the DMCA's Anti-Circumvention Provisions
March 01, 2006
According to a recent decision in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the use of an illicitly obtained password and username to enter an otherwise secure Web site does not violate the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). In <i>Egilman v. Keller & Heckman LLP</i>, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28245 (D.D.C. Nov. 10, 2005), the court held that the law firm Keller & Heckman and others working in concert with it who entered Dr. Egilman's Web site through the use of a username and password that they were not authorized to use had not violated the DMCA, regardless of how the username and password were obtained. This surprising decision runs counter to other decisions interpreting the DMCA and would appear to create a significant loophole to the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions.
Downloading Copyrighted Songs on File-Sharing Network Is Not 'Fair Use'
March 01, 2006
In an important decision interpreting the fair use provision of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. §107), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that downloading full copies of copyrighted material without compensation to authors cannot be deemed "fair use." In <i>BMG Music v. Gonzalez</i>, 430 F.3d 888 (7th Cir. 2005), Judge Frank H. Easterbrook, writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, rejected the defendant's argument that she was immune from liability because she was merely sampling songs that she had downloaded from the KaZaA file-sharing network on a "try-before-you-buy basis."
The Market Power Presumption Revisited: Court to Consider Whether Patents Confer Market Power in Tying Cases
February 02, 2006
Antitrust law has long prohibited producers with market power from engaging in tying arrangements, agreements in which the sale of a highly desired "tying" product is conditioned on the purchase of a second item. The Supreme Court has held that sellers must exert power over the marketplace to be guilty of illegal tying under the Sherman Act. Does the existence of a patent on a product create a presumption of market power? On June 20, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in <i>Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc.</i>, 2005 WL 770269, *1 (U.S.) (2005) to consider this question.
IP News
February 02, 2006
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Damage Dilemma: Conflicting Standards for Disgorging Trademark Infringer's Profits
February 02, 2006
Is willfulness a prerequisite for recovering a defendant's profits under 35 U.S.C. §1117(a) for infringing a registered mark or for violations under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act? Maybe. It depends on the circuit in which the case is decided, but it shouldn't. The substantive rights and remedies under the Lanham Act should be uniformly interpreted throughout the nation. This is especially so with respect to monetary remedies in view of the Trademark Amendments Act of 1999, which should have, but did not, resolve this issue.
Infringement By Source Code 'Golden Master': Developments in Patent Infringement Law Concerning Extra-U.S. Sales
January 04, 2006
Until recently, U.S. software companies comfortably operated under the assumption that selling software that was copied from a "golden master" CD outside of the United States, and which was sold only to customers outside of the United States, did not infringe U.S. patents. Recent developments in the law have destroyed that comfort and made clear that infringement liability may very well lie for exactly those types of foreign sales.
IP News
January 04, 2006
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Nonphysical Differences Are Enough to Create Material Differences with Gray Market Goods
January 04, 2006
Under U.S. law, the resale of imported genuine goods bearing a valid U.S. trademark generally does not constitute trademark infringement. This is in part because, under the first sale doctrine, the trademark protections under U.S. law can be exhausted after the trademark owner's first authorized sale anywhere of the product bearing the trademark. Thus, U.S. law does not generally preclude the sale of identical genuine goods bearing a legitimate trademark even if the sale in the United States is unauthorized by the trademark owner.
