Yellow Pages Group appealed from a $123,000 judgment entered against it, in favor of Yellow Pages Photos following a jury verdict in a copyright infringement trial in district court. Yellow Pages Photos cross appealed, raising several claims of error. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Yellow Pages Group’s renewed motion for a judgment as a matter of law and also concluded that Yellow Pages Photos arguments on cross appeal lacked merit and thus did not warrant a new trial on damages.
The latest chapter in the Apple v. Samsung saga, previously blogged about here, involves an amicus brief filed by several large technology firms in support of a rehearing on the amount of damages owed to Apple by Samsung. If granted, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will hear again arguments that those damages should be based on profits attributable to only the infringing portion of the Samsung device, rather than profits made on the entire device. If the Federal Circuit is persuaded, the decision could lower exposure for patent infringement across the industry.
The Supreme Court in Alice, Mayo, Myriad, and Bilski -- four cases in just four years -- dramatically redefined the issue of subject matter eligibility in patent law. That is, the initial threshold question of whether an invention is eligible for obtaining patent protection in the first place. The broad strokes of these cases left much to be desired, particularly and most recently in Alice, in which the Supreme Court created a vague 2-step analysis in determining when a (software or business method) invention is merely an "abstract idea", and therefore not patent eligible. Understandably, the US PTO has encountered difficulty in applying the Alice analysis following the case, but has strived to offer some additional clarity in its latest July 2015 update to its prior 2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility.
Apple’s newest device the Apple Watch, which was released a few months ago, is now the subject of a trademark dispute with a European trademark holder. Probendi, an Irish software development company and owner of the rights to the “iWatch” trademark in the European Union, is upset that Apple bought Google ads for the term “iWatch”. If you run a Google search of the term “iWatch”, the top result and advertisement will be for the Apple Watch.
Electronic Dance Music (EDM) Famed DJ Deadmau5 and The Walt Disney Company have settled their trademark dispute over the use of the “Deadmau5 Mouse Head” Logo. Just when it seemed likely that the two sides were headed for a lengthy legal battle over the use of the Deadmau5 logo, it has been revealed that the two sides have reached a settlement agreement.
As discussed earlier on our blog, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case of Kimble v. Marvel Ent. Inc., a patent case deciding if its prior decision in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964) should be overruled. This week, the Supreme Court upheld Brulotte in Kimble v. Marvel Ent. Inc., 576 U.S. ___ (2015) in a 6-3 decision involving Spider-man references, the classic doctrine of stare decisis, and a spirited dissent.
Heirs of the estate of Randy Craig Wolfe, aka Randy California, lead guitarist, singer and songwriter for the band Spirit, have filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging that key portions of Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway To Heaven”, arguably the band’s biggest hit, are actually from the California penned “Taurus”, a song he composed while just 16 years old.
In a 6-2 decision handed down in Commil v. Cisco, the Supreme Court has held that a defendant's good faith belief that a patent is invalid does not serve as a defense to charges of inducing infringement of that patent, overturning the previous U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decision.