Friday, 06 May 2011 21:08


Written by

Earlier this week, CNET and its parent company, CBS, were sued by a coalition of artists led by Alki David –-a film producer with along-standing vendetta against CBS – for "direct[ly] participat[ing] in massive copyright infringement.” The dispute, which arises from links posted to LimeWire and other peer-to-peer systems via CNET’s website, has the potential to shed additional light on the doctrine of secondary infringement liability. Specifically, the case will turn on whether CNET’s actions can be characterized as “inducing” or “encouraging” copyright infringement. 

Friday, 08 April 2011 21:06


Written by

On Monday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) heard oral arguments in the Myriad case (AMP v. USPTO).  This case concerns several patents licensed by Myriad Genetics that involve the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are implicated in breast cancer.  The questions before the Court include whether patents claiming "isolated DNA" and certain diagnostic methods are patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.  The issue of standing is also before the Court.

Over the past few years, the federal trial courts had been issuing inconsistent results regarding the requirements for pleading the requisite ‘intent to deceive the public’ in false patent marking claims asserted under 35 U.S.C. Section 292.
Thursday, 17 March 2011 21:05


Written by

In honor of St. Patrick's Day, today we present a bit of Irish-related IP news.

Craig Venter, a scientist renowned for his research in synthetic life, made headlines by creating self-replicating synthetic bacteria containing a custom-made genome designed entirely from scratch.  To make sure the bacteria created were the result of the custom genome and not an assembly of naturally occuring bacterial DNA, Venter and his team encoded particular segments of text into the DNA sequence to act as watermarks.  Included in one of these watermarks was a quote from James Joyce's novel A Portrait of the Artist As A Young Man.

Saturday, 09 March 2013 21:05


Written by
On March 8, 2011, the U.S. Senate passed its version of proposed patent reform, the Patent Reform Act of 2011 (S.23), by a 95-5 vote. Among other things, the Patent Reform Act would generally establish a first-to-file system to replace the current first-to-invent system, bringing U.S. law closer to that of other jurisdictions around the world. Some commentators have noted that if ultimately signed into law, this bill would constitute the most significant patent law overhaul in over a half-century.
Thursday, 03 March 2011 21:03


Written by
It is fairly well known that the framers of the United States Constitution had a profound respect for intellectual property, and that Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution explicitly establishes copyrights and patents on a federal scope:

Last week, Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (ACT) was granted a patent (U.S. Patent No. 7,893,315) for its “single-blastomere” technology that provides a non-destructive method for deriving human embryonic stem cells (hESC).  In ACT’s technique, a single cell is biopsied from an embryo and cultured to produce a hESC line.  The process does not destroy the embryo or impair the embryo’s subsequent development, hence the technique has been touted as “embryo-safe.”  This technique is similar to pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) that has been used in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) for many years. 

This past week, the Senate conducted hearings on the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act which, if passed, would provide the Attorney General with broad authority to shut down U.S. and foreign internet sites “dedicated to infringing activities.” The Act was introduced in September 2010 and unanimously approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee late last year; nevertheless, it has yet to receive a full vote on the Senate floor. If passed, the Act would require the U.S. Attorney General to independently investigate potentially infringing websites and submit these findings to a judicial board. The board would then determine whether the site is “dedicated to infringing activities"; if so, the government would (1) suspend operation and lock the domain name; (2) ban credit card companies and financial institutions from processing any domestic transactions related to the site; and (3) prohibit online advertisers from working with or sending traffic to the site. And, in what is perhaps the best news for copyright owners: the government would do all of this free-of-charge. Not surprisingly, then, the Act’s most ardent proponents include the RIAA, MPAA, and the Screen Actors Guild.