Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search

We found 1,371 results for "The Intellectual Property Strategist"...

Willfulness and Liability, Separate But Equal?
August 02, 2013
This article summarizes <i>Bosch</i> and highlights the practical implications of the Federal Circuit's decision.
Rader's Olive Branch: <i>Ultramercial II</i> Resolves the Judicial Deadlock of <i>CLS Bank</i>
August 02, 2013
The Federal Circuit's <i>en banc</i> decision in <i>CLS Bank Int'l v. Alice Corp.</i> was roundly criticized as a "nightmare," further cementing the impression that the court was confused and in conflict over the requirements of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C '101.
Supreme Court Weighs in on Reverse Payment Settlement Agreements
August 02, 2013
On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held in <i>Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc.</i> that so-called "reverse payment" settlement agreements should be analyzed under a rule-of-reason analysis under which the court weighs the pro- and anti-competitive effects of such agreements on a case-by-case basis.
Hidden Issues in Balance Sheets
July 26, 2013
Attorneys for creditors and debtors, and bankruptcy judges, are making recommendations or decisions based on only cursory consideration of potentially misleading balance sheets.
Joinder Issues in BitTorrent Copyright Litigation
July 02, 2013
Over the past several years, there has been a national flurry of civil actions brought primarily by pornographic filmmakers alleging copyright infringement by individual file-sharers using the BitTorrent computer protocol.Typically, the copyright holders allege that users illegally downloaded, reproduced and distributed at least a portion of the film at issue using BitTorrent, a peer-to-peer protocol that allows users to transfer large files on the Internet.
<i>Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc.</i>
July 02, 2013
In <i>Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc.</i>, the Federal Circuit held that the functional claim language of "spaced relationship" was definite in view of the inherent parameters of the claimed apparatus, notwithstanding the lack of any specific quantification of exactly how wide the spacing should be.
In <i>CLS Bank,</i> the Federal Circuit Agrees to Disagree
July 02, 2013
The intellectual property community hoped and expected that the Federal Circuit's <i>en banc</i> decision in <i>CLS Bank Int'l v. Alice Corp.</i> would provide guidance regarding the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. ' 101. Instead, the Federal Circuit's decision created confusion, identifying three competing tests for assessing patentable subject matter under ' 101.
IP News
June 30, 2013
Federal Circuit Vacates Award of Attorney Fees
Copyright vs. Trademark Claims
May 31, 2013
Whatever one thinks of the ruling in <i>Fleischer I</i>, the decision serves as an important reminder of something for which it has received little attention: its careful consideration of the distinctions between copyright and trademark protection.
The RAND Modified Hypothetical Negotiation
May 31, 2013
On April 25, 2013, Judge James L. Robart of the Western District of Washington publicly issued his Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law from the November 2012 bench trial in <i>Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.</i>

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
    This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
    Read More ›
  • Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
    Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
    Read More ›
  • The Stranger to the Deed Rule
    In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
    Read More ›