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
April 29, 2010
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
False Patent Marking Cases Become the New Craze
April 29, 2010
Since Jan. 1, 2010, over 130 cases have been filed that accuse defendants of false patent marking. This recent tidal wave of false marking litigation contrasts with the relative calm of the past in which only approximately 40 false patent marking cases total were filed from 2000'2009. What caused the underwater earthquake? The decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in <i>Forest Group, Inc. v. Bon Tool Co.</i>
Myriad: How Did Public Policy Weigh In?
April 29, 2010
In Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York invalidated patents related to isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. The surprising aspect of the decision was the reason for invalidity ' the district court held that the isolated genes did not constitute patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. ' 101.
Stayin' Alive: An Overview of Copyright Termination
April 29, 2010
The year 2013 will mark the first year that authors can take advantage of the Copyright Act's ' 203 termination provision, likely setting off a flood of termination notices by artists seeking to regain rights previously granted to record labels, book publishers, advertising agencies, and other content owners. This newly effective right, particularly when combined with the increasing number of works subject to termination under the Act, will soon bring to the legal forefront the complex and until now largely ignored termination provisions of the Copyright Act.
IP News
March 29, 2010
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow: The Tale of a Retroactively Vacated Consent Injunction
March 29, 2010
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, apparently in response to plaintiff's plans to use the criminal law system to press for a civil resolution of its motion for contempt, vacated L'Oreal USA Inc.'s 20-year injunction against a re-seller of genuine hair care products.
i4i L.P. v. Microsoft Corp.
March 29, 2010
The Federal Circuit's recent decision in <i>i4i L.P. v. Microsoft Corp.</i>, on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas, contains valuable lessons on a number of procedural issues, particularly on the importance of timely motions during trial in order to preserve matters for appeal.
JA Apparel v. Abboud
March 29, 2010
Cases involving family name disputes have historically presented challenges for courts, as they frequently require balancing competing interests of businesses and individuals. A particularly interesting permutation of such disputes involves well-known individuals who convey certain rights in their family name in a particular field to a third party and then later seek to re-enter the same field. A trio of recent decisions on this subject features the famous clothing designer, Joseph Abboud.
IP News
February 24, 2010
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Limited Pre-trial Discovery in Europe: Use Strategic Patent Prosecution to Reduce the Impact
February 24, 2010
This article explores what patent strategies should be implemented to enable infringement litigation in jurisdictions without discovery.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • 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 ›