Issues and developments related to Intellectual Property (e.g. Copyright, Fair Use, Patents, Trademarks, Trade Secrets) and Open Movements (e.g. Open Access, Open Data, Open Educational Resources (OER)), examined in the "Intellectual Property and Open Movements" and "Ethics of Data, Information, and Emerging Technologies" graduate courses I teach at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information. -- Kip Currier, PhD, JD
"Editor's Note:This op-ed was originally published by Project Syndicate.
“The copyright and patent laws we have today look more like intellectual monopoly than intellectual property,” wrote Brink Lindsey and Steven Teles in their recent book about the U.S. economy. Concerns about overprotection of intellectual property acting as a barrier to innovation and its diffusion are not new. But they have gained greater salience now that knowledge has emerged as a dominant driver of economic activity and competitive advantage.
Digital technologies have enabled the emergence of an “intangible economy,” based on soft assets like algorithms and lines of code, rather than physical assets like buildings and machinery. In this environment, intellectual-property rules can now make or break business models and reshape societies, as they determine how economic gains are shared."
The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History, in
collaboration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, will
host the 2018 National Trademark Exposition. The exposition is a free,
family-friendly event where you can learn about trademarks. It will
feature educational workshops, exhibits and hands-on activities
demonstrating the important role trademarks play in our economy and our
lives. Children's activities, including scavenger hunts, interactive
games, and trademark design workshops, will be offered both days. Free continuing legal education (CLE) seminars will be offered for legal professionals.
Exhibitors
1000 Cranes, LLC
American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
DC Rollergirls
Edible IP, LLC (DBA Edible Arrangements)
Girl Scouts Nation’s Capital
Global Brand Council, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
International Trademark Association (INTA)
Looshes Labs LLC
Microsoft
NASA Goddard Space Flight Cente
National Park Service (United States Department of the Interior) and National Park Foundation
NumbersAlive!
Politics and Prose
Safeway
Segway Inc.
Tenneco Automotive
The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
[Kip Currier: A very savvy undergraduate student in a Pitt course for which I was guest lecturing on Patents and Trademarks earlier this month asked me about resale rights in the U.S.
Timely article on recent developments, given my lecture yesterday on International Intellectual Property, moral rights, and the U.S.'s Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 too.]
"The idea of moral rights continues to be a notable difference between
European and American intellectual property rights with respect to
visual arts. Last week’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in a case brought by artist Chuck Close and others addressing the California Resale Royalty Act
(the CRRA) underscores those distinctions. In holding that the CRRA is
mostly preempted by federal copyright law and thus can be applied to
entitle artists to secondary royalties only for sales of art in a single
calendar year—1977—the 9th Circuit affirmed the skepticism with which
American law continues to regard anything other than classic copyright.
Given the failure of efforts to pass national legislation to provide for
resale royalties, this decision is probably the end of the line for the
foreseeable future in the U.S. for droit de suite, the term of art used to describe the concept."
[Kip
Currier: I'm teaching 15 online students in my Intellectual Property and "Open" Movements course this Summer Term and posted this announcement on our Courseweb site today:
I highly recommend reading this article, especially as a
capstone to the material we have explored this term and in conjunction
with your reading of this course's final required text, Reclaiming Fair Use by Pat Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi.
Questions to consider:
What did you notice about fair use from reading the article?
In what ways does U.S. fair use compare with South Africa's proposed fair use right?
What are some ways that the proposed South Africa fair use right may impact copyright holders, users, and other stakeholders?
Did you notice which persons and organizations are the authors of the article?
How about that fair use is a "defense" in the U.S. and a "right" in the South African proposal?
How
does the proposed South African fair use right compare and contrast
with the recent controversial European Union Copyright Directive?
What else...?]
"Sean Flynn, American University Washington College of Law Michael W. Carroll, American University Washington College of Law Peter Jaszi, American University Washington College of Law Ariel Katz, University of Toronto, Faculty of Law Leandro Mendonça, Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Cultural Production Department Diane Peters, Creative Commons Corporation (HQ) Allan Rocha de Souza, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ)
In addition to a set of more open specific exceptions, the South Africa
bill contains a well-crafted and unique general exception for “fair
use.” The magic of the South African general exception is not in
adopting the term “fair use.” The phrases “fair use” and “fair dealing”
mean the same thing. The key change is the addition of “such as” before
the list of purposes covered by the right, making the provision
applicable to a use to a use for any purpose, as long as that use is
fair to the author...
We believe that the South African proposal gets it just right. We
commend its Parliament on both the openness of this process and on the
excellent drafting of the proposed fair use clause. We are confident it
will become a model for other countries around the world that seek to
modernize their copyright laws for the digital age."
[Kip Currier: I had a similar reaction to the author of this article when I attended a truly eye-opening 4/20/18 American Bar Association (ABA) IP Law Conference presentation, "DarkNet: Enter at Your Own Risk. Inside the Digital Underworld". One of the presenters, Krista Valenzuela with the New Jersey Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Cell in West Trenton, New Jersey, did a live foray into the Dark Web. The scope of illicit activities and goods witnessed in just that brief demo was staggering and evoked a feeling that scenes of "black market" contraband and "bad actors" endemic to dystopian sci-fi fare like Blade Runner 2049 and Netflix's Altered Carbon are already part of the present-day real-world.] "It’s fascinating to see how this community works together to take down “western” systems and derive chaos and profit from it. Typically, hackers in first-world countries are terrified to work together due to the multiplicative risk of a group being caught. In Russia, however, the authorities don’t seem to care that these hackers are wreaking havoc on the west. They are left to their own devices, and most users on this forum have been regular members for over six years. A lot of the information on this forum is incredibly worrying, even if a lot of it is harmless 15-year-olds trying to be edgy and hack their friend’s phones. In any case, it’s important to know these communities exist. The dark underbelly of the internet isn’t going anywhere."
Steven Seidenberg, Intellectual Property Watch; Native Tribes Can’t Shield Patents From USPTO Review "The strategy was breathtaking in its boldness. Just days before the
USPTO was to hear a challenge to Allergan Inc.’s patents on a dry-eye
drug, Restasis, the company transferred those patents to a Native
American tribe; the tribe then sought to dismiss the USPTO proceedings
by asserting sovereign immunity. Following this action, a number of
other patentees made similar transfers to Native tribes, in order to
protect their patents. More patentees were poised to do so, should this
ploy prove effective. It, however, did not. On 20 July, the Federal
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the tribe’s sovereign immunity did not
protect its patents from USPTO review. The ruling thus kept intact a key
component of America’s patent system."
Musk used the cartoon image on Twitter, without attribution, to promote his Tesla
electric car range, and ignored Tom Edwards’ attempts to come to a
licensing arrangement, telling the artist’s daughter it would be “kinda
lame” to sue."
[Kip Currier: This
is a deeply troubling "library theft" and "breach of the public trust"
story, with enormous implications about ethics, management, leadership, and Board responsibility and oversight. It'll definitely be a case study in my courses at the University of Pittsburgh and in the ethics textbook I'm writing.
Reading the Perry Mason-esque True Crime-confessional details (e.g. Priore: "greed came over me. I did it, but Schulman spurred me on") in The Post-Gazette's front-page article brought to mind the oft-heard adage "Crime doesn't pay"--a favorite slogan of the FBI, starting in 1927, and then
used in the comic strip Dick Tracy in 1931.]
"It ranks as one of the largest library thefts in history.
Greg Priore, 61, of Oakland, who worked as the sole archivist and
manager of the library’s rare book room since 1992, is charged with
theft, receiving stolen property, conspiracy, retail theft, library
theft, criminal mischief and forgery.
John Schulman, 54, of Squirrel Hill, who owns Caliban Book Shop, is
charged with theft, receiving stolen property, dealing in proceeds of
illegal activity, conspiracy, retail theft, theft by deception, forgery
and deceptive business practices...
“Priore explained that he took a lot of maps and pictures – in all
possibly 200 items – from the Oliver Room. Priore then stated ‘You got
me, I screwed up.’ He also stated, ‘Please tell [library executive
director] Mary Frances [Cooper] I am sorry and I let the whole place
down.’”"
[Kip Currier: Interesting to see this "music video about a trademark plea" by VELCRO Brand Fasteners. During a guest lecture on Trademarks and Patents for undergraduate students at the University of Pittsburgh School of Computing and Information earlier this week, I mentioned VELCRO as an example of a company trying to avoid the fate of becoming a "generic mark" through "genericide". As Tom Kulik writes in a 7/2/18 article, "Losing Your Brand Identity: How To Commit Trademark Genericide Without Really Trying", for Above The Law, "acceptance
that rises to the level of identification with the specific good or service (as
opposed to the source of such goods or
services) is the death knell for trademarks." Examples of generic marks include Aspirin, cellophane, escalator, trampoline, and zipper. I first became aware of VELCRO's genericide-avoidance efforts when I spoke with a VELCRO Representative working at the company's booth for the 2016 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's National Trademark Expo in Washington, D.C. I was able to find in my 2016 National Trademark Expo Swag Bag the informational pamphlet VELCRO passed out at the Expo:
I was invited by the VELCRO Rep to take the VELCRO Hook and Loop Challenge...
Using 3 different types of VELCRO of varying strength...
VELCRO Samples, 2016 USPTO National Trademark Expo, (c) James "Kip" Currier
The back of the pamphlet and the VELCRO Rep explained the varied uses for which the different types of VELCRO are
deployed...
I mentioned that I teach IP Law at Pitt and the VELCRO Rep nicely gave me 3 samples to take back to show.
The white-and-green-striped VELCRO rolls (in the upper right section of the above photo of the 3 samples) are freebie samples that the VELCRO booth persons were also passing out to National Trademark Expo attendees.] "Those aren’t lawyers on Velcro Companies’ new music video thanking
the public for its angry feedback. They are actors playing lawyers. But in-house lawyers were involved in the making of the video, Corporate Counsel
reports. And they believe the company’s “Don’t Say Velcro” campaign has
been successful, even if some people did have a negative, F-bomb-loaded
reaction to its plea to save its trademark. Velcro wants people to use
VELCRO® Brand (as an adjective, as in “VELCRO® Brand fasteners) when
referring to its product, and to use “hook and loop” when referring to
scratchy, hairy fasteners made by other companies. Velcro released an initial video
last September in which actors playing lawyers explain in song that the
Velcro patent has lapsed and the company will lose its trademark if the
word is used to refer to all hook-and-loop fasteners. Some actual
in-house lawyers also made appearances in the original video." “We’re asking you not to say a name it took 50 plus years to build,”
one character sings. “But if you keep calling these Velcro shoes, our
trademark will get killed.”"
"A new search engine that aims to connect nonacademics with open-access research will be launched this fall.
Get the Research
will connect the public with 20 million open-access scholarly articles.
The site will be built by Impactstory -- the nonprofit behind browser
extension tool Unpaywall -- in conjunction with the Internet Archive and the British Library."
"IBM asked a jury on Monday to award the company $167 million in a lawsuit against deals site Groupon for using patented technology without authorization, according to Reuters.
IBM's lawyer reportedly said in federal court in Delaware that Groupon infringed patents
involving e-commerce technology that had already been licensed to
Amazon, Facebook and Google for between $20 million and $50 million per
company.
"Most big companies have taken licenses to these
patents," said IBM lawyer John Desmarais, according to Reuters. "Groupon
has not. The new kid on the block refuses to take responsibility for
using these inventions."
Groupon's lawyer reportedly argued that
IBM exceeded the coverage of its patents and claimed ownership of
fundamentals of the internet."
"The removal of Conn’s tweet created a minor tabloid furor in the U.K.
It
also raised broader questions about how effectively accusations of
copyright infringement are enforced on digital platforms, and whether
such notices — and the filter technologies that are likely behind them — take into account copyright exceptions and fair use of material."
"The US government has filed charges of theft
of trade secrets against a former member of Apple's self-driving car
team, according to MacRumors.
The
former employee, Xiaolang Zhang, was arrested Saturday in San Jose,
California, while attempting to fly to China and was questioned by the
FBI regarding the alleged theft of Apple's intellectual property.
According to a criminal complaint filed Monday in federal court, Zhang
confessed to the theft. Zhang could face up to 10 years in prison and a
$250,000 fine.
According to the court filing, Zhang was hired in
2015 to work on Apple's self-driving car project designing and testing
circuit boards that would analyze sensor data."
"The copyright and patent system in the United States acknowledges both
the need to incentivize innovation as well as the need for public
access. It is a utilitarian view that promotes further creation.
Advocating for a system that incentivizes the creator or inventor while
simultaneously protecting the interest of the public isn’t an
anti-intellectual property stance, it’s one that encourages more
creative works and innovations."
"Last week, a federal judge ordered the Postal
Service to pay the statue’s creator $3.5 million for exploiting the
sculpture without permission or consent.
So much for love stories.
When thing started to go bad, some people blamed the statue.
More
exactly, they blamed the artist, Robert S. Davidson. He sued for
copyright infringement in 2013, claiming that the Postal Service had
sold billions of the stamps, even after the government realized it had
confused an image of his plaster sculpture at the New York-New York
Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas for the 19th-century stone-and-copper
behemoth off the shore of the real New York."
The proposed directive is due to be revisited in September, with a European Parliament debate and possible changes.
It's not yet known whether Articles 11 and 13 will be removed or amended.
If
eventually adopted by the European Parliament, the directive will be
sent to the EU Council, which also has to approve it - a process that
could take months.
Usually, the Parliament and the Council agree - but if they don't, they'll form a committee to try and reach consensus.
Once
they've both agreed and approved the directive, it has to be put into
law by every member state on a country-by-country basis, in a process
the EU calls transposition.
That can take a year or two, as each country navigates its own legal and parliamentary system."
"A federal judge has ordered China's largest wind-turbine firm, Sinovel, to pay $59 million for stealing trade secrets from a Massachusetts-based technology company.
Last January, Sinovel was found guilty
of stealing trade secrets in federal criminal court in Madison, Wis.
The company paid an Austria-based employee of American Superconductor
Corp. to steal its source code for software that powered wind turbines.
This
kind of intellectual property theft has been highlighted by the Trump
administration as a reason for levying 25 percent tariffs on $34 billion
of Chinese goods entering the U.S., which began on Friday. China
retaliated with tariffs on $34 billion worth of U.S. goods."
Elliot Harmon, Electronic Frontier Foundation; California Can Lead the Way in Open Access "There’s a bill in the California legislature that would be a huge win
for open access to scientific research. The California Assembly
recently passed A.B. 2192
unanimously. We hope to see it pass the Senate soon, and for other
states to follow California’s lead in passing strong open access laws.
Under A.B. 2192, all peer-reviewed, scientific research funded by the
state of California would be made available to the public no later than
a year after publication. Under current law, research funded by the
California Department of Public Health is covered by an open access law,
but that provision is set to expire in 2020. A.B. 2192 would extend it
indefinitely and expand it to cover research funded by any state agency."
On
one side are news organizations, broadcasters and music companies that
want to control how their content spreads across the web, and to be paid
more for it. On the other are tech companies such as Facebook and
Google, which argue that they funnel viewers and advertising revenue to
media outlets, and free-speech advocates, who say that regulating the
internet would set a dangerous precedent and limit access to
information.
That battle flared up in
Europe on Thursday. Two powerful industries faced off — technology
against media, platforms against publishers — in an unusually aggressive
lobbying campaign in the European Parliament over a bill that would
impose some of the world’s strictest copyright laws, which would have
required tech companies to filter out unlicensed content and pay for its
use.
On this occasion, tech prevailed; the proposal was voted down."
E'oin O'Carroll, The Christian Science Monitor; Equity pending: Why so few women receive patents "The causes for the gender gap are varied and complex, but much of it can be explained by women’s underrepresentation in patent-intensive jobs, particularly engineering. Research shows women make up roughly 20 percent of graduates from engineering schools, but hold less than 15 percent of engineering jobs. Female engineering grads are not entering the field at the same rate as their male counterparts, and they are leaving in far greater numbers. “It’s the climate,” says Nadya Fouad, a professor of educational psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. “The organizational environment is very unforgiving.” Professor Fouad, who spent three years surveying women with engineering degrees about their career choices, cites inflexible schedules, a lack of opportunities for advancement, and incivility toward women. “It’s not the women’s fault,” she says, noting that she found no difference in levels of confidence in those who stayed and those who left. Other barriers women face are an absence of supportive social networks and implicit bias on the part of venture capitalists."
James Temperton, Wired; The EU's dodgy Article 13 copyright directive has been rejected "The European Parliament has voted against a controversial proposed new copyright law that critics warned could imperil a free and open internet. The Copyright Directive, which contained the particularly concerning Article 13, was rejected by 318 votes to 278, with 31 abstentions. The EU’s proposed copyright reforms will now be debated again in September, giving policymakers more time to discuss and refine the crucial dossier... The rejected proposals would have placed far greater responsibility on individual websites to check for copyright infringements. It gained the support of former Beatle Sir Paul McCartney, while Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web, warned it threatened internet freedom."
"The X-Men own their own trademark, at least as far as it goes to
creating superhero teams known as the X-Men. Which does suggest they
could have sued the likes of X-Force, X-Factor, or other knock-off teams
if they had wanted. Also…
…it looks like the trademark was registered by Charles Xavier and passed
to Kitty when he died. Now that he is back as X — will he want the
trademark back too? Registration Wars coming to a summer event near you
soon…"
Intellectual Property Watch; WIPO Marrakesh Treaty On Copyright Exceptions For Blind Readers Clears US Senate "The World Intellectual Property Organization Marrakesh Treaty on
copyright exceptions enabling international access to published works by
blind and print-disabled readers was ratified this week by the United
States Senate, putting it one step closer to final ratification in the
country.
The implementing
legislation now goes to the US House of Representatives, and then on to
the President, according to the bill summary. The US will then have to
prepare and deposit its instrument of ratification to WIPO."
Jacqueline Taylor, Houston Chronicle; A trademark can protect that clever slogan "Q: I’ve come up with a catchy and distinctive slogan for my
new small business, and I’d like to make sure no one else uses it. Would
a trademark legally protect it?
A: Good timing on your question. The UH Bauer
College Small Business Development Center is offering a special workshop
on “Protecting Your Business With Trademarks” from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30
p.m. on July 17. It will provide the answer and walk you through the
process. You’ll learn how a strong trademark can not only protect your
brand but also help customers find your business.
The workshop will be led by Anne Cullotta of the Culotta Law Firm.
Register for the $29 class, which will be held at the SBDC’s Midtown
office on Fannin Street, at sbdc.uh.edu.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website, uspto.gov, also is a
helpful resource. Find a detailed explanation of the trademark process;
an explanation of the difference between patent, trademark and copyright
protection; and the difference between registering a domain name,
business name and trademark. The information will help you determine if
trademark protection is what you’re looking for and what the process
entails.
You should be aware that there’s a difference between what’s known as
a “common law” trademark and a federally registered trademark."
"The manner by which each studio dealt with Quicksilver ended up being an
intriguing case study in how shared IP rights in elements of a
character could be similarly depicted in two separate media entities."
[Kip Currier: Given the facts as presented in this article (and knowing that the U.S. only recognizes "moral rights" vis-a-vis the very narrow Visual Artists Right Act [VARA]), is there anyone who still doesn't think that at the very least the "decent" thing to do would have been for Elon Musk/Tesla to provide attribution (let alone some kind of compensation) when repeatedly using Tom Edwards' image? Imagine if the situation were reversed and someone was using Elon Musk's "original expressions" without attribution.]
"Edwards said he wanted to speak out in part because he often hears
similar stories from artists. “I realize my farting unicorn is not as
serious as whistleblowers,” he said, “but honestly, it’s all about
integrity.”
He added: “I’d really like to get on Elon Musk’s good side … He’s really really interesting. But he isn’t above copyright law.""
Adithi Koushik, Intellectual Property Watch; Indigenous Knowledge Databases: Is It Something To Be Concerned About? "Almost all information today ends up in a database. It is organised
and made readily accessible. While it sounds positive, for indigenous
communities, it can be crucial. Databases of their knowledge, culture
and genetic resources, if misused, can undermine generations of
community effort and maybe even their sustainability. A panel of
indigenous peoples’ representatives presented their concerns about
databases this week to governments attending a World Intellectual
Property Organization meeting on genetic resources.
The discussion in the Indigenous Panel at the 36th round of the Intergovernmental Committee at WIPO, held between 25th and 29th of June, centered on the collection of material for, administration and use of databases and contracts."
Victoria Lee, DLA Piper via Lexology; Intellectual property basics for startups: trade secrets "The crown jewels of a typical technology company are often found in
its intellectual property portfolio. Having a good basic understanding
of intellectual property protection is essential for entrepreneurs to
extract value out of their company’s key assets and manage opportunities
and risk arising from them. Among these key assets is the trade secret.
Our colleague Victoria Lee outlines what startups need to know about trade secrets in this article."
"In the Ninth Circuit ruling – which is the one that will now hold
until another appeals court takes on the topic and/or the Supreme Court
decides to revisit the issue in future – the court said that a copyright
holder is obliged to consider whether the content they are planning to
send a DMCA notice to is legal under the fair use doctrine.
Which is great. Except the court also decided that
the rightsholder is entitled to reach the decision of whether that is
true or not entirely by themselves.
Which on one level provides a sort of equilibrium but
on the other means that it is inevitable that there will be lots of
future court cases as people argue all over again about what is fair
use.
In other words, this 11-year court battle has not
really resolved anything and we can expect to see another one on the
exact same topic soon."
[Kip Currier: This CNN article has a link to an interesting 2 min. 6 sec. video, "Patents: A history of innovation", highlighting some examples of U.S. patents, from the 1st one--to a Philadelphia inventor for potash in 1790 and signed by Pres. George Washington--to the 10 millionth, issued to a Raytheon employee on June 20, 2018.]
"Google, Apple, Amazon(AMZN)
and others are pushing forward with a range of new patents touching on
artificial intelligence, cloud computing, drones and virtual reality,
according to an analysis of patent activity late last year from CB Insights.
"I do think more recently, companies -- especially startups -- are
realizing that just being a cool application is not enough," says Ethan
Kurzweil, a partner at Bessemer Venture Partners. They want to be
"inventing some core piece of technology, whether it be AI, machine
learning, autonomous driving, or computer vision. ... Patents will
matter a lot more in those contexts.""
[Kip Currier: Informative brief podcast, spotlighting a patent librarian's work at New York Public Library and the costs and time involved with submitting a patent application.]
"The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is
getting more patent applications than ever before — six times as many as
it did in 1980. But does that mean that America is more creative and
innovative than ever before? Well, not necessarily. Here's what you need
to know..."
"Bethesda Softworks
is suing Warner Bros. Entertainment and Canadian game developer
Behaviour Interactive for allegedly using code from its “Fallout
Shelter” game to create a new “Westworld” mobile app.
Bethesda filed the suit in a District of Maryland court on Thursday,
Jun. 21. It’s accusing Behaviour of breach of contract, copyright
infringement, unfair competition, and misappropriation of trade secrets.
It’s also suing Warner Bros. for allegedly persuading Behaviour to
breach that contract. It now wants both companies to remove each and
every version of the “Westworld” mobile game from distribution and to
stop developing and supporting it. They are also asking for undisclosed
statutory and punitive damages."
James Parsons, Business.com; Trademark Basics: What Can and Can't Be Trademarked? "When you’re producing graphics for your website, whether it’s a logo for
the corner navigation or an illustration for a blog post or landing
page, those are assets of value. You might have paid a graphic designer
for them, or you might have made them yourself, but either way, they’re
worth protecting. So can you trademark them?"
Lawyer Catherine M.C. Farrelly was trying to get a
trademark registration for the iconic scent of Play-Doh, the modeling
compound that has been sold as a children’s toy since 1956. The Patent
and Trademark Office requires a specimen of any trademark, so the scent
had to be sent. Farrelly, of Frankfurt, Kurnit, Klein & Selz PC, New
York, told Bloomberg Law that she sent the application in February 2017
with a note that a box of Play-Doh was on its way by overnight
delivery.
Hasbro Inc.’s success in getting a trademark
registration in May 2018 for the smell of Play-Doh might serve as a
model for lawyers tasked with securing aroma-related trademarks,
trademark lawyers told Bloomberg Law."
"There are now at least three different kinds of marks which can be
registered without challenge. The first category includes marks that
comprise, well, hate speech — the name of the pro football team in
Washington, as an example. The second falls into Tam’s context —
self-referential marks.
But the third group is different. Like a team playing defense, these
trademark owners seek to register marks to keep the rest of the public
from doing so.
In perhaps the most surprising result of the
court’s ruling, the applicants for several of the most offensive terms
did so not to sell merchandise, but to stop others from doing the same."
"Today marks a milestone of in the American innovation economy. Back in 1836, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued patent No.1
under the current numbering system. It took 155 years to get up to
patent No. 5 million and then just another 27 years to issue 5 million
more. Patent number No. 10 million was
issued this afternoon for something called "Coherent Ladar Using
Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection." The technology is owned by Raytheon,
and it was invented by Joseph Marron, a principal engineering fellow at
the company's Space and Airborne Systems division. He talked with
Marketplace host Kai Ryssdal about his invention. The following is an
edited transcript of their conversation..."
Zoe Corbyn, The Observer via The Guardian; Nathan Myhrvold: ‘Nasa doesn’t want to admit it’s wrong about asteroids’ "In 2000, you left Microsoft and set up Intellectual Ventures,
which primarily buys and licenses patents. The business is often
vilified as one of the world’s biggest “patent trolls”. Why do you think
people find it so loathsome?
I fundamentally think what we
do is good. It is hard for me to get too worked up about figuring out
why it is bad. Any patent holder who enforces their rights gets called a
patent troll. Silicon Valley feels very threatened by anything that
could challenge its authority. If you are one of the big companies, like
Google or Apple, almost no one can challenge you in the market that
you’re in. But if somebody has a patent, they can ask for a bunch of
money. The more you can get a return from an invention, the better off
the world will be. It will lead to more inventions being funded and more
inventing...
President Trump is going after China’s intellectual property theft. Given your experience, can he succeed in curbing it?
The theft of intellectual property by Chinese companies
is a very serious issue. It’s not just private companies in China or
little companies. A large amount of it is state-owned enterprise. So, it
really is the Chinese government doing it. Exactly how to solve that
issue, I don’t know. You need the Chinese government to be very serious
about it, but so far they haven’t been. In my experience in business,
you mostly do better with negotiating in quiet diplomacy, not with
brinksmanship. But I’ve never built luxury hotels and golf courses.
Maybe it is different there."