Is the threat of a copyright lawsuit stifling music?; BBC News, July 12, 2017

Chi Chi Izundu, BBC News; Is the threat of a copyright lawsuit stifling music?

"You would be hard-pushed to find a musician in the charts whose work hasn't taken inspiration from their idols and contemporaries.

Now though, music experts have told the Victoria Derbyshire programme that artists are being advised not to mention publicly who has inspired them.

This is because of a high-profile copyright infringement case in which US jurors ruled that Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams, on their song Blurred Lines, had copied Marvin Gaye's Got To Give It Up."

Getting Your Grooves Back: Understanding Copyright Termination (Guest Column); Variety, July 10, 2017

Evan S. Cohen, Esq., Variety, Getting Your Grooves Back: Understanding Copyright Termination (Guest Column)

"There is a powerful law causing quiet yet uneasy waves in the music industry, and it’s something the record companies would rather recording artists not know about.

For recordings released after 1977, the law is a section of the Copyright Act that allows recording artists to terminate their record contracts after 35 years. It also allows songwriters to terminate their music publishing deals after 35 years. It’s usually called copyright termination, but it’s not the copyrights that are being terminated, it’s the grant of rights to the record company that is being terminated. That old, awful record contract from 1980? Gone — at least as the contract applies to the United States. On the first day of the 36th year, the band owns the recording, free and clear. That is a very powerful position, to say the least."

Major CRISPR Patent-Holders Agree to Patent Pool; The Scientist, July 10, 2017

Aggie Mika, The Scientist; Major CRISPR Patent-Holders Agree to Patent Pool

"The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Rockefeller University, Harvard University, and MIT have turned over 22 of their CRISPR-Cas9 patents for consideration to be part of a shared, global licensing platform. The Wall Street Journal reports that “the move comes amid growing concerns that the logjam over rights to the technology may hinder breakthroughs in disease treatment.”

“We look forward to working with others to ensure the widest possible access to all key CRISPR intellectual property,” says Chief Business Officer of the Broad Institute Issi Rozen in a news release issued today (July 10).

Groups seeking to commercialize CRISPR technology are often required to go to more than one institution for licensing, according to the Broad’s statement, given that there are 18 different organizations in the U.S. that hold more than 60 CRISPR-Cas9 patents. A pool would simplify this process by creating “a one-stop shop for commercial users.”"

Why drugmakers aren’t sweating the next wave of patent losses; Bloomberg News via News Chief, July 10, 2017

Bloomberg News via News Chief; Why drugmakers aren’t sweating the next wave of patent losses

"Drugmakers plunged off a patent cliff earlier this decade, losing billions in sales as lucrative branded drugs lost exclusivity. An expensive lobbying effort aimed at preventing a repeat is paying off.

The loss of a series of key patents for cholesterol fighters and other widely used medicines cost big-name drug companies about $82 billion in sales between 2011 and 2013, according to life-sciences data company Evaluate Ltd., forcing large-scale job cuts and a wave of deals to make up for lost revenue...

By the time lawmakers passed a path to market for biosimilars as part of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, the industry had assured that competition would come much more slowly, making the resulting sales decline look less like a precipice and more like a gentle hill."

55 Years Ago Today, Volvo Received a Patent that Saved Countless Lives; CNet, July 10, 2017

Andrew Krok, CNet; 55 Years Ago Today, Volvo Received a Patent that Saved Countless Lives

"Instead of sitting on the patent and licensing it out to other automakers for a big ol' chunk of change, Volvo opened up the patent so that any automaker could incorporate it into vehicles. The automotive industry took the idea and ran with it, and it proved so safe and popular that derivatives of Bohlin's original design are still in use today.

Back in 2009, Volvo estimated that more than 1 million people have been saved by the three-point seatbelt. That number has obviously risen since then, and they all have Volvo and Nils Bohlin to thank for it."

MIT convenes ad hoc task force on open access to Institute’s research; MIT News, July 7, 2017

MIT Libraries, MIT News; MIT convenes ad hoc task force on open access to Institute’s research

"MIT’s provost, in consultation with the vice president for research, the chair of the faculty, and the director of the libraries, has appointed an ad hoc task force on open access to MIT’s research. Convening the task force was one of the 10 recommendations presented in the preliminary report of the Future of Libraries Task Force.

The open access task force, chaired by Class of 1922 Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Hal Abelson and Director of Libraries Chris Bourg, will lead an Institute-wide discussion of ways in which current MIT open access policies and practices might be updated or revised to further the Institute’s mission of disseminating the fruits of its research and scholarship as widely as possible.

“To solve the world’s toughest challenges, we must lower the barriers to knowledge,” says Maria Zuber, vice president for research. “We want to share MIT’s research as widely and openly as we can, not only because it’s in line with our values but because it will accelerate the science and the scholarship that can lead us to a better world. I look forward to seeing the Institute strengthen its leadership position in open access through this task force’s work.”"

Waymo Drops Most Patent Claims in Car Tech Fight With Uber; Bloomberg, July 7, 2017

Eric Newcomer, Bloomberg; Waymo Drops Most Patent Claims in Car Tech Fight With Uber

"Waymo, Alphabet Inc.’s self-driving car division, dropped three of four patent-infringement claims in its lawsuit against Uber Technologies Inc. over the startup’s autonomous vehicle program.

Waymo’s decision to include patent claims in its complaint against Uber was a surprise move for Google parent Alphabet, which normally prides itself on limiting patent fights. The bulk of Waymo’s case is not over patents, but trade secrets."

COPYRIGHT OFFICE RECOMMENDS PERMANENT EXEMPTIONS TO SOFTWARE LOCKS; Repair Association via KTIC, July 7, 2017

Joe Gangwish, Repair Association via KTIC; COPYRIGHT OFFICE RECOMMENDS PERMANENT EXEMPTIONS TO SOFTWARE LOCKS

"A U.S. Copyright Office report says it no longer wants to review exemptions to Section 1201 of the Digital Millenium Copyrights Act every three years. The office wants Congress to pass laws that give consumers a permanent “right-to-repair.”"

Texas Judge Sets Patent Venue Test for a Post-TC Heartland World; Inside Counsel, July 6, 2017

Scott Graham, Inside Counsel; Texas Judge Sets Patent Venue Test for a Post-TC Heartland World

"The first big post-TC Heartland shoe has dropped on the patent world.

U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas set down ground rules last week for maintaining cases in the district following the Supreme Court's decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods resetting venue rules.

Gilstrap laid out four factors he will consider when deciding whether a company has a “regular and established place of business” that gives rise to venue. While a fixed physical presence such as a store or office will tend to be persuasive, “that is not a prerequisite to proper venue,” Gilstrap wrote. His rules appear to open the door for internet companies to continue being sued in the Eastern District in some circumstances."

Right to use HHGregg’s name and other intellectual property fetches just $400,000; Indianapolis Business Journal, July 7, 2017

Scott Olson, Indianapolis Business Journal; Right to use HHGregg’s name and other intellectual property fetches just $400,000

"Failed retailer HHGregg Inc., which racked up more than $2 billion in annual revenue prior to landing in bankruptcy this March, has sold its name and other intellectual property rights for a mere $400,000.

Court records show that at an auction late last month, an entity called Valor LLC scooped up the rights to the Indianapolis-based company’s trademarks, domain names, customer files and other data.

Buyers of a defunct retailers' intellectual property sometimes do so with the intention of resurrecting the brand, either as an online-only business or with brick-and-mortar locations. It's not clear what Valor's intentions are. Company principal Michael Eisner did not respond to phone calls or an email.

HHGregg’s intellectual property became available after the electronics and appliance retailer failed to find a buyer and closed all 220 its stores this spring."

Protecting Your Business: When To Consult An Intellectual Property Lawyer; CBS Los Angeles, July 6, 2017

Christopher Millard, CBS Los Angeles; Protecting Your Business: When To Consult An Intellectual Property Lawyer

"To many a small business owner, legalese can inspire fear in the heart. Intellectual property law is no exception, but this critical legal concept is tantamount to the health and well-being of your business. As Darren Dahl of the New York Times points out, “They see images of expensive lawyers and use that as an excuse to ignore the topic, reasoning that it is a problem for big companies to worry about.” He goes on to point out that through the rise of the internet, protecting your intellectual property has become a necessity. Small businesses are threatened more so, due to the lack of personnel to police intellectual property infringement.

So, let’s decode exactly what intellectual property means, and when you need to call in a lawyer to help your organization...

This article was written by Christopher Millard for CBS Small Business Pulse"

Saved by Alice: How a Key Supreme Court Decision Protects Businesses from Bad Patents; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 22, 2017

Daniel Nazer and Elliot Harmon, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Saved by Alice: How a Key Supreme Court Decision Protects Businesses from Bad Patents

"In 2014’s Alice v. CLS Bank, the Supreme Court ruled that an abstract idea does not become eligible for a patent simply by being implemented on a generic computer. Since then, Alice has provided a lifeline for real businesses threatened or sued with bogus patents.

This week, on the third anniversary of Alice, EFF is launching a new series called Saved by Alice where we’ll collect these stories of times when Alice came to the rescue. Over the next few weeks, we’ll be sharing stories of business owners large and small. You’ll meet an app developer who was sued over a bogus patent on computerized treasure hunts, a software company whose customers were targeted by a patent troll, and a photographer sued for practices that had been common in the field for years. These stories all have one thing in common: someone with a patent on an abstract idea sued a small business, and that business could have lost everything. But Alice came to the rescue.

Why are we telling these stories? Because Alice is under attack. A few loud voices in the patent lobby want to amend the law to bring back these stupid patents. It’s time to tell the stories of the individuals and businesses that have been sued or threatened with patents that shouldn’t have been issued in the first place."

Swedish Neo-Nazis Frozen Out In Trademark Fight; NPR, July 5, 2017

Scott Neuman, NPR: Swedish Neo-Nazis Frozen Out In Trademark Fight

"A German manufacturer of deep freezers has won a trademark battle with Swedish neo-Nazis over the group's name — which the company says is too easily confused with its own.

The extremist group, known as the Nordic Resistance Movement (NRM), or "Nordfront" for short, is too similar to Nordfrost, the firm that claims to be the world's sixth-largest maker of deep freezers."

Intellectual Freedom and Open Access: Working Toward a Common Goal?; American Libraries, June 25, 2017

Jennifer Putnam Davis, American Libraries; Intellectual Freedom and Open Access: Working Toward a Common Goal?

"How do the principles of intellectual freedom and open access intersect? That was the topic of the “Intellectual Freedom and Open Access: Working Toward a Common Goal?” panel discussion, sponsored by the Intellectual Freedom Round Table, which addressed the relationship from several different perspectives."

Louisiana considers radical step to counter high drug prices: Federal intervention; Washington Post, July 3, 2017

Carolyn Y. Johnson, Washington Post; Louisiana considers radical step to counter high drug prices: Federal intervention

"At [Louisiana’s health secretary Rebekah] Gee’s urging, Joshua Sharfstein, a professor of public health at Johns Hopkins University and a former Food and Drug Administration deputy commissioner, convened a meeting of health-policy specialists and economists. They advised that the state ask the federal government to intervene in a two-pronged approach: Gee should first ask the government to negotiate with a drug company and license a medication, in line with a recent recommendation by a committee from the National Academies.

At the same time, they advised Gee to pursue a harder-edged tactic, in case the voluntary approach did not work: Gee should ask the secretary of health and human services to invoke a century-old law that allows the government to use patents at a reasonable cost. The panel recommended a price as low as $1,000 per patient.

The law was used routinely in the 1950s and 1960s to make medicines available at lower prices. It was considered but not used during the anthrax attacks in 2001. It has been used by more than 10 government agencies or departments to lower the prices for patented inventions, including night-vision goggles for the Defense Department.

“The drug has been out for years, and we’re failing to provide it to the majority of people who have this infection,” Gee said. “We’re failing at our mission to improve the public health, and so just doing what we’re doing is not an option and we have to do better.”"

Chocolate Aplenty, but Nary a Wonka Bar to Be Found; New York Times, July 3, 2017

Michael Paulson and David Gelles, New York Times; Chocolate Aplenty, but Nary a Wonka Bar to Be Found

"The Wonka brand passed from company to company in a wave of late-20th-century corporate mergers and acquisitions, and along the way came a real-world Wonka Bar, Peanut Butter Oompas, Everlasting Gobstoppers and other candies. In 1993 Nestlé, a Swiss conglomerate, acquired the Wonka name from a British candymaker, Rowntree Mackintosh Confectionery, and, for a time, nurtured the Wonka brand, which eventually encompassed candies including SweeTarts, Nerds and Laffy Taffy, followed by Wonka Exceptionals. But the entire Wonka line has since been discontinued.

Nestlé has been hoping “to refocus the magic of Wonka toward future product offerings around the world,” according to Roz O’Hearn, a company spokeswoman. “We’re considering a variety of options, but for now, our innovation plans remain confidential, so I cannot share more info.”

‘Bombshell’ Canadian Patent Ruling Seen Favoring Foreign Companies; Bloomberg, June 30, 2017

Josh Wingrove, Bloomberg; ‘Bombshell’ Canadian Patent Ruling Seen Favoring Foreign Companies

"“It’s a bombshell of a decision,” said Richard Gold, a law professor at Montreal’s McGill University who studies intellectual property. He’s a member of the university’s Centre For Intellectual Property Policy, which intervened in the case. “We’re now the only country in the developed world that when an inventor says, ‘my invention does X,’ it doesn’t actually have to do X.”

The Supreme Court ruled that a current standard, known as the “promise doctrine,” goes too far, because it allows for patents to be invalidated if an invention doesn’t do any of the things it promised."

Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?; Guardian, June 27, 2017

Stephen Buranyi, Guardian; Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?

"The idea that scientific research should be freely available for anyone to use is a sharp departure, even a threat, to the current system – which relies on publishers’ ability to restrict access to the scientific literature in order to maintain its immense profitability. In recent years, the most radical opposition to the status quo has coalesced around a controversial website called Sci-Hub – a sort of Napster for science that allows anyone to download scientific papers for free. Its creator, Alexandra Elbakyan, a Kazhakstani, is in hiding, facing charges of hacking and copyright infringement in the US. Elsevier recently obtained a $15m injunction (the maximum allowable amount) against her.

Elbakyan is an unabashed utopian. “Science should belong to scientists and not the publishers,” she told me in an email. In a letter to the court, she cited Article 27 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, asserting the right “to share in scientific advancement and its benefits”.

Whatever the fate of Sci-Hub, it seems that frustration with the current system is growing. But history shows that betting against science publishers is a risky move. After all, back in 1988, Maxwell predicted that in the future there would only be a handful of immensely powerful publishing companies left, and that they would ply their trade in an electronic age with no printing costs, leading to almost “pure profit”. That sounds a lot like the world we live in now."

Intellectual Property 101: What Your Business Needs To Know About Trademark Law; Forbes, June 26, 2017

Art Neill, Forbes; Intellectual Property 101: What Your Business Needs To Know About Trademark Law

"Co-author Teri Karobonik contributed to this post*

When you think of a “trademark” you may think of a logo (Apple’s apple logo) or a product or service name (Forbes). You may even assume that trademarks are only a concern for internationally famous brands like fashion companies (Prada) and fast food (Pizza Hut).

In reality, trademark protection extends further than logos and can cover everything from sounds (the 20th Century Fox Fanfare before the opening movie credits), to colors (the “green” on a John Deere tractor), to the design of a taco shop.

Although many of the common examples you hear about are large corporate brands, understanding trademark protection is just as important for startups, independent creators, and small business. So what do trademarks do? They protect consumers from confusion regarding the source of products or services. As your business grows, trademarks become a significant asset because they are the way consumers identify and relate with your company.  You also need to know how and when your business can use the trademarks of other companies.

In this second part of this four part series (see Part 1 on Copyright here), we’ll break down one of the 4 main types of intellectual property (Trademark)  and explain..."

Coraopolis man accused of taking trade secrets from Harsco; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, June 30, 2017

Len Boselovic, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Coraopolis man accused of taking trade secrets from Harsco

"A Camp Hill company that recycles mill waste is accusing a former employee from Coraopolis of taking thousands of pages of documents containing trade secrets to a competitor that planned to use them to develop products of its own.

A federal judge based in Pittsburgh this week ordered Stephen Miranda, a former employee in Harsco Corp.’s Sarver office, to remain on administrative leave from Phoenix Services, the Chester County company Mr. Miranda went to work for after leaving Harsco in April."

One Year On: Developments in the Protection of Trade Secrets; U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Director's Forum Blog, June 29, 2017

Director's Forum Blog

One Year On: Developments in the Protection of Trade Secrets Guest blog by Chief Policy Officer and Director for International Affairs Shira Perlmutter U.S. businesses own an estimated $5 trillion worth of trade secrets. Their theft, involving losses in the tens or possibly hundreds of billions of dollars a year, poses a serious threat to our nation’s economy. Because the protection of trade secrets — which by their nature are not patented or publicly disclosed — is critical to the commercial viability of many U.S. businesses, Congress passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016. The law provides trade secret owners with a federal civil cause of action, rather than limiting them to state laws or criminal enforcement. Last month, one year after enactment of the law, the USPTO convened a public symposium on “Developments in Trade Secret Protection.” The event brought together nearly 200 participants, at the USPTO’s headquarters in Alexandria Virginia, and via live webcast to individuals and the USPTO’s four regional offices. Shira Perlmutter at Trade Secrets Symposium The symposium consisted of four panels focused on various aspects of trade secret protection. The first panel, of business economists, discussed recent trends, including how to estimate the value of trade secrets and calculate damage awards in litigation, and how calculating damages in trade secret cases differs from cases involving other forms of intellectual property. The second panel, a group of attorneys, addressed the use of the Defend Trade Secrets Act in practice, including the provisions for ex parte seizure of stolen trade secrets. The third panel, with participants from academia, private practice, and the World Intellectual Property Organization, examined the differing ways in which other countries have implemented trade secret protection and identified the elements that make up an effective regime. The final panel brought together participants from private practice, the U.S. government, and U.S. Chamber of Commerce to role-play as a corporate legal team called on to consider enforcement options for dealing with a case of trade secret misappropriation occurring overseas. The practical information exchanged at the symposium should help governments and trade secrets owners improve protection for this valuable form of intellectual property in the United States and abroad. In helping to take forward the federal government’s 2017–2019 Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement, the USPTO will continue its work to promote the adoption of effective systems of trade secret protection and enforcement around the world.Videos of all four sessions of the trade secret symposium are posted  to the Trade Secret Policypage of the USPTO website, as well as additional useful information about the protection of trade secrets. Read more from the Director's Forum Blog

Stay connected with the USPTO by subscribing to regular email updates. Visit our subscription center at www.uspto.gov/subscribe to update or change your email preferences. This email was sent from an unmonitored mailbox. To contact us, please visit our website www.uspto.gov/about/contacts. To ensure that you continue to receive our news and notices, please modify your email filters to allow mail from subscriptioncenter@subscriptions.uspto.gov.

Should robot artists be given copyright protection?; Phys.org, June 26, 2017

Andres Guadamuz, Phys.org; Should robot artists be given copyright protection?

"But who owns creative works generated by artificial intelligence? This isn't just an academic question. AI is already being used to generate works in music, journalism and gaming, and these works could in theory be deemed free of copyright because they are not created by a human author.

This would mean they could be freely used and reused by anyone and that would be bad news for the companies selling them. Imagine you invest millions in a system that generates music for video games, only to find that music isn't protected by law and can be used without payment by anyone in the world."

Lawyers Rally to Save ‘McMansion Hell’ from Zillow’s Copyright Claim; Fortune, June 27, 2017

Jeff John Roberts, Fortune; Lawyers Rally to Save ‘McMansion Hell’ from Zillow’s Copyright Claim

"A Zillow spokesperson has sent the following statement to media outlets:

"We are asking this blogger to take down the photos that are protected by copyright rules, but we did not demand she shut down her blog and hope she can find a way to continue her work," the statement reads.

The McMansion Hell controversy is likely to end with Wagner's site going back online, and with Zillow becoming the latest victim of what is known as "the Streisand effect"—a phenomenon in which an attempt to use dubious legal tactics to smother an issue on the Internet results in even more publicity for that issue. (Ironically, the original Streisand effect case—named for Barbara Streisand—also turned on mansions)."

Sleepless Nights for GCs Caused by Regulations and Crisis Management; Inside Counsel, June 22, 2017

Jennifer Williams-Alvarez, Inside Counsel; Sleepless Nights for GCs Caused by Regulations and Crisis Management

"The inaugural "General Counsel Up-at-Night" report looks at responses to an online survey conducted in spring 2017 from more than 200 U.S.-based general counsel and other in-house legal decision-makers.

The results reveal that the most pressing challenges faced by respondents are: regulations and enforcement; privacy and data security; risk and crisis management; litigation; and intellectual property. Among these, the biggest concerns are regulations and enforcement, with 74 percent of respondents identifying this as a very important challenge, followed by privacy and data security with 65 percent and risk and crisis management with 63 percent."

REMINDER re Free Webinar: Understanding Patent Basics: Law Librarians Bringing Added Value June 28, 2017, 2 PM ET

Webinar

Understanding Patent Basics:

Law Librarians Bringing Added Value

June 28, 2pm ET

As a law librarian you serve a wide array of lawyers so you may not have a background specific to patent law. Many law librarians feel they could be more productive if they could better communicate in patent attorney "speak" and may feel awkward in asking for definitions of basic patent terminology.

As part of our efforts to offer on-going support to law librarians, LexisNexis IP Solutions is offering a crash course in basic patent concepts to help you better communicate with your colleagues.

Join us for this informative webinar which will demystify patent terminology and review basic concepts. The presenters will discuss:

• Common terms in patent law, such as "What is a provisional patent application?"
• What patents lawyers are looking for in terms of help from their law librarians relevant to common concepts.
• Why research related to each of these terms, or concepts, are important in the area of patent prosecution.
• Q&A to answer those questions you have been meaning to ask.
  
  Sign up today! We will provide slides from the webinar to all registrants.
  
  The presenters are Amantha Allen, User Experience and Professional Development Manager, LexisNexis^® IP Solutions and Megan McLoughlin, Product Director, LexisNexis PatentAdvisor®