DISNEY SUES LIGHTSABER ACADEMY FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT; Comic Book Resources, 10/17/16

Jacob Hill, Comic Book Resources; DISNEY SUES LIGHTSABER ACADEMY FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT:

"According to The Hollywood Reporter, Michael Brown operated numerous businesses based on the Star Wars trademark including New York Jedi, the Lightsaber Academy and Thrills and Skills. After serving multiple cease and desist notices, Disney finally filed a complaint with the California federal court."

Tell the Copyright Office: Copyright Law Shouldn't Punish Research and Repair; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), 10/11/16

Corynne McSherry, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Tell the Copyright Office: Copyright Law Shouldn't Punish Research and Repair:

"In enacting the “anti-circumvention” provisions of the DMCA, Congress ostensibly intended to stop copyright “pirates” from defeating DRM and other content access or copy restrictions on copyrighted works and to ban the “black box” devices intended for that purpose. In practice, the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions haven’t had much impact on unauthorized sharing of copyrighted content. Instead, they’ve hampered lawful creativity, innovation, competition, security, and privacy.

In the past few years, there’s been a growing movement to reform the law. As locked-down copyrighted software shows up in more and more devices, from phones to refrigerators to tractors, more and more people are realizing how important it is to be able to break those locks, for all kinds of legitimate reasons. If you can’t tinker with it, repair it, or peek under the hood, then you don’t really own it—someone else does, and their interests will take precedence over yours.

It seems the Copyright Office has heard those concerns. As part of an ongoing study, it’s asking for comments (PDF) on whether it should recommend that Congress enact a series of permanent exemptions to the law for several important and useful activities, including security research and repair."

Abbott and Costello Heirs Lose Appeal Over Broadway Play's Use of "Who's on First" Routine; Hollywood Reporter, 10/11/16

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Abbott and Costello Heirs Lose Appeal Over Broadway Play's Use of "Who's on First" Routine:

"On Tuesday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of a copyright lawsuit brought by the heirs of William "Bud" Abbott and Lou Costello against producers of the Tony Award-nominated play Hand to God. However, the appeals court didn't accept dismissal for the same reason the lawsuit was initially thrown out. And in coming to its decision, the 2nd Circuit raises the possibility that the world- famous comedy routine "Who's on First?" is no longer under copyright."

The Man Musicians Call When Two Tunes Sound Alike; New York Times, 10/11/16

Alex Marshall, New York Times; The Man Musicians Call When Two Tunes Sound Alike:

"People often hear similarities between songs when no copying has occurred, Mr. Bennett says. That should not be a surprise. Most songwriters follow a strict set of rules — songs being three to four minutes long or having four beats to a bar — so there is actually much scope for similarity. But the truth is that many songwriters do use other people’s music for inspiration.

“Society’s become enamored by the romantic myth of creativity,” he says. “The idea that inspiration comes to us in a genius-like way from God or the spirit or whatever. Often for songwriters, that is how it feels emotionally. But, of course, every songwriter is partly a product of their influences. Allowing yourself to be influenced by a song — just not copying the melody, chords or lyrics — is perfectly fine. I mean, isn’t that what songwriting actually is?”

Mr. Oxendale agrees. “A lot of famous songs have been created using reference tracks and there’s nothing wrong with that,” he says. “There would be no Beethoven without Haydn. Who would want to have lost his music?”"

What spoons have to do with the Samsung-Apple patent lawsuit; PBSNewsHour, 10/11/16

Gretchen Frazee, PBS NewsHour; What spoons have to do with the Samsung-Apple patent lawsuit:

"The court’s task is not to determine whether Samsung infringed on Apple’s patents but to determine how much money Samsung should pay Apple for doing so.

It marks the first time in 120 years that the the court has reviewed a design patent case. (The Supreme Court has reviewed patents based on function, but not appearance.) And the last design patent cases reviewed by the high court dealt in saddles, rugs and spoons.

In fact, one particular case involving 19th-century spoons, Gorham v. White, was cited multiple times by lawyers before the Supreme Court on Tuesday."

Apple-Samsung iPhone patent feud leaves U.S. top court struggling; Reuters, 10/11/16

Andrew Chung, Reuters; Apple-Samsung iPhone patent feud leaves U.S. top court struggling:

"The fierce, big-money patent fight between Apple and Samsung left the U.S. Supreme Court groping for a solution on Tuesday, as the justices puzzled over how to discern the value of individual design elements in a complex product like an iPhone.

The eight justices heard arguments in Samsung's bid to pare back $399 million of $548 million it paid Apple in December following a 2012 jury verdict finding that it infringed Apple's iPhone patents and copied its distinctive appearance in making the Galaxy and other competing devices.

The $399 million penalty stemmed specifically from Samsung's violation of three Apple patents on the design of the iPhone's rounded-corner front face, bezel and colorful grid of icons that represent programs and applications."

The government and the courts are finally getting fed up with patent trolls — and stupid patents; Los Angeles Times, 10/11/16

Michael Hiltzik, Los Angeles Times; The government and the courts are finally getting fed up with patent trolls — and stupid patents:

"Almost nobody disputes that America’s patent system is a mess, or that it’s been that way for an unconscionably long time.

Overworked and misguided patent examiners issue patents for manifestly undeserving claims. An entire industry of patent trolls has sprung up to assemble patent rights and exploit them, not to make products or develop services, but to harass other businesses into paying them off to avoid costlier litigation.

Efforts to reform patenting tend to run into resistance from big businesses, such as the pharmaceutical industry, that long ago figured out how to game the process and are disinclined to give up their advantage. As a result, a system that was written into the U.S. Constitution to encourage invention and innovation has been turned into a “dead weight … on the nation’s economy.”"