Technology Media and Telecom

The Internet presents special regulatory challenges. Any effective statute, for instance, must be prepared by an entity with the authority to draft, implement and, to some extent enforce, the statute. Efficacy, of course, hinges on jurisdiction, but the Internet knows no geography and, so, users leap boundaries with a finger poke or thumb flick. These challenges require novel statutory strategies to meet the Internet's current and future status as a channel and communications domain that requires regulation at various levels of operation and use, including e-commerce.

Professional services requiring insight and judgment ' and application of sophisticated expertise on a case-by-case basis ' seemed immune to the e-commerce onslaught. After all, no one wants to trust the future welfare of one's family and affairs to a device that makes the phrase 'computer problem' a redundancy. And why would people who need to spend thousands of dollars on estate planning even think about trusting an online service just to save a few dollars ' even if only to pass on post-mortem thoughts from the grave?

Recent developments you need to know.

This is the second installment of a two-part series on the proposed move from a patent system granting priority of patent rights based upon invention dates to a system in which priority is based primarily upon filing dates. The first installment discussed the history behind the current first-to-invent system and the basics of the proposed changes to the system. This installment explores the statutory bars under the proposed legislation and other changes affecting prior art.

In a recent case, a patent owner claimed to have invented side impact airbag sensing. The patent enabled an embodiment; that was stipulated. In opposition to a motion for summary judgment of invalidity for lack of enablement, the owner asserted that enablement of a preferred embodiment satisfied the enablement requirement of the patent law. It didn't. The case is only one of several consistent cases. You should beware, and consider the matter in both patent prosecution and litigation. If you own a patent, and wish for a broad construction, be careful what you wish for.

Saying they 'dispensed deception,' a federal judge in Atlanta has ordered the founders and operators of a now-defunct online pharmacy business to pay the FTC $15.8 million for fraudulent claims associated with the drugs they peddled. In his order, issued June 4, U.S. District Judge Charles A. Pannell also found Dr. Terrill Mark Wright, a physician associated with the online pharmacies, liable for $15.4 million to compensate consumers for false advertising claims.

The problem of child pornography on the Internet has long bedeviled Congress. But the legislature has floundered between the First Amendment's protection of speech and the self-evident evils involved in child porn's production and consumption, leaving a trail of laws invalidated by the High Court. The most recent legislative iteration ' the PROTECT Act, upheld on May 19 by the Supreme Court in United States v. Williams ' raises new and intriguing questions about the relation of sexual and political speech.

The federal 'Orphan Works' legislation (S2913 and HR5889) creates an entirely new law favoring the 'opt in' fundamentalists who prefer as many copyright formalities as possible, thereby increasing the likelihood that works will fall ' intentionally or unintentionally ' into the public domain. Some have characterized the import of the Orphan Works legislation as creating a new rateless compulsory license, or at a minimum a 'safe harbor' for libraries (such as the Library of Congress), museums, public broadcasters and universities, as well as commercial entities.