USPTO Releases 2018 Performance and Accountability Report; Guest Blog by Chief Financial Officer Tony Scardino, January 31, 2019

Director's Forum: A Blog from USPTO's Leadership

Blog homepage | A tribute to veteran... »

Thursday Jan 31, 2019 

 

USPTO Releases 2018 Performance and Accountability Report 

Guest Blog by Chief Financial Officer Tony Scardino

"I’m pleased to announce that the USPTO has published its Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for fiscal year (FY) 2018. The PAR serves as the USPTO’s annual report, similar to what private sector companies prepare for their shareholders. Each year the USPTO publishes this report to update the public on our performance and financial health.

Our FY 2018 PAR charts the agency’s progress toward meeting goals outlined in our 2014-2018 Strategic Plan: optimizing patent quality and timeliness; optimizing trademark quality and timeliness; and providing domestic and global leadership to improve intellectual property policy, protection, and enforcement worldwide. In addition, the PAR provides information on the USPTO’s progress towards a broader management goal:  achieving organizational excellence.  These goals drive the quality and quantity of our service to intellectual property stakeholders over the last five years.

Quote by President Abraham Lincoln on the patent system, as displayed on the Herbert C. Hoover federal building in Washington D.C., headquarters of the U.S. Department of Commerce

While the PAR is a record of our achievements, it is also an honest discussion of the challenges we face as an agency moving forward under our new 2018-2022 Strategic Plan, which was published in November. We will continue efforts to issue predictable and reliable patents; continue implementation of the patent dispute resolution portions of the America Invents Act (AIA), including ensuring that procedures and standards are balanced and predictable; monitor and help address dynamic IP issues in Congress and the Courts; maintain the high and sustained trademark performance level in the face of significant trademark application growth rates; improve the customer experience and develop outreach at both headquarters and regional offices; expand on dissemination of data; maintain sustainable funding; and ensure our IT systems enable our nationwide workforce to serve our customers with a “24/7/365” operational capability.

Here at the USPTO, we take pride in producing a PAR that meets the highest standards of transparency, quality, and accountability. The PAR contains a wealth of data and historical information of interest to our stakeholders, including data on patent and trademark examining activities, application filings, and agency staffing levels. This information is conveniently presented in the workload tables section at the end of the PAR.

On the issue of financial performance, FY 2018 marks the 26th consecutive year that the USPTO’s financial statements have received an unmodified audit opinion. Our clean audit opinion gives the public independent assurance that the information presented in the agency’s financial statements is fairly presented and follows generally accepted accounting principles. The auditors did note a deficiency in our internal controls related to managing and configuring IT system access. We have already begun developing plans to address the auditor’s concerns. Despite this deficiency, the auditor found no material weaknesses in the USPTO’s internal controls, and no instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations affecting the financial statements.

The PAR is a faithful snapshot of the USPTO’s FY 2018 performance. I hope you find value in this document, and that it allows you to glean greater insights into the agency’s activities and achievements."

The Role Of The Centre For Data Ethics And Innovation - What It Means For The UK; Mondaq, January 22, 2019

Jocelyn S. Paulley and David Brennan, Gowling WLG, Mondaq; The Role Of The Centre For Data Ethics And Innovation - What It Means For The UK

"What is the CDEI's role?

The CDEI will operate as an independent advisor to the government and will be led by an independent board of expert members with three core functions³:

• analysing and anticipating risks and opportunities such as gaps in governance and regulation that could impede the ethical and innovative deployment of data and AI;
• agreeing and articulating best practice such as codes of conduct and standards that can guide ethical and innovative uses of AI; and
• advising government on the need for action including specific policy or regulatory actions required to address or prevent barriers to innovative and ethical uses of data.

As part of providing these functions, the CDEI will operate under the following principles;

• appropriately balance objectives for ethical and innovative uses of data and AI to ensure they deliver the greatest benefit for society and the economy;
• take into account the economic implications of its advice, including the UK's attractiveness as a place to invest in the development of data-driven technologies;
• provide advice that is independent, impartial, proportionate and evidence-based; and
• work closely with existing regulators and other institutions to ensure clarity and consistency of guidance

The CDEI's first project will be exploring the use of data in shaping people's online experiences and investigating the potential for bias in decisions made using algorithms. It will also publish its first strategy document by spring 2019 where it will set out how it proposes to operate with other organisations and other institutions recently announced by the government, namely the AI Council and the Office for AI."

So Much TV, Too Little IP Yields Writers Rich Rewards; Variety, January 31, 2019

Elaine Low, Variety; So Much TV, Too Little IP Yields Writers Rich Rewards

"The sheer volume of television out there is changing how precious intellectual property is foraged, acquired and ultimately used."

UN agency finds US, Asian companies seek most AI patents; Associated Press, January 31, 2019

Associated Press; UN agency finds US, Asian companies seek most AI patents

"The U.N.’s intellectual property organization says companies in Japan, South Korea and the U.S. are the top filers of patent applications involving artificial intelligence.

The World Intellectual Property Organization has issued a first report aiming to show trends in AI, seen as a growth area in coming years, although still a tiny fraction of all patent applications each year.

WIPO said Thursday that machine learning is the dominant AI technique disclosed in patents."

US Trademark Office Approves Application To Register The Shape Of A Burger; Mondaq, January 31, 2019

Donna A. Tobin, Mondaq; US Trademark Office Approves Application To Register The Shape Of A Burger

"The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO")  recently approved registration of the irregular shape of a hamburger patty as a trademark, meaning that the owner of the mark, Bubba Foods LLC (Bubba's) had made a sufficient showing to the USPTO that the below shape of its burger was not functional and that the shape itself serves to identify Bubba Burgers as the source of  burgers so shaped. 

Such marks, known as "product configuration marks" are less common than more typical trademarks, such as names, slogans or logos. However, while the process is not an easy one, such non- traditional trademarks, which can also protect aspects of a product such as smells, sounds and the appearance of a retail establishment, can confer powerful rights on an owner."

Game of Life Copyright Dispute Meets 'Day of Reckoning'; Law.com, January 30, 2019

Scott Graham, Law.com; Game of Life Copyright Dispute Meets 'Day of Reckoning'

"Markham died in 1993. His heirs sued in 2015, invoking a provision of the Copyright Act of 1976 that allows authors to terminate licenses after 56 years in certain circumstances.

But that provision excludes works for hire, and Smith concluded that the Game of Life is a work for hire that was commissioned by Klamer and produced by Markham’s company. “The weight of the evidence in this case is that the success that met the Game of Life was, in fact, nothing if not the result of collective effort,” Smith concluded. “And although the credit, in the colloquial sense, can be split pro rata, the law dictates that the copyrights cannot be.”"

Second China-Bound Apple Car Worker Charged With Data Theft; Bloomberg, January 30, 2019

Kartikay Mehrotra and Mark Gurman,

Bloomberg; Second China-Bound Apple Car Worker Charged With Data Theft

"An Apple Inc. hardware engineer was charged by the U.S. with stealing the iPhone maker’s driverless car secrets for a China-based company, the second such case since July amid an unprecedented crackdown by the Trump administration on Chinese corporate espionage...

As President Donald Trump ratcheted up his trade war with China, the Justice Department in November announced a “China Initiative” aimed at prioritizing trade-theft cases and litigating them as quickly as possible.

San Francisco prosecutors have brought trade-secret theft cases against Chinese nationals who worked for companies as diverse as Micron Technology Inc., a memory chipmaker, and drug maker Genentech Inc. This week, the U.S. charged Huawei Technologies Co., China’s largest telecommunications company, with stealing secrets from its American partner, T-Mobile US Inc."

US hammers Huawei with 23 indictments for alleged trade secret theft, fraud; CNet, January 29, 2019

Abrar Al-Heeti, CNet; US hammers Huawei with 23 indictments for alleged trade secret theft, fraud

"The US Department of Justice on Monday charged Huawei with theft of trade secrets, wire fraud and obstruction of justice.

A 10-count indictment alleges that China's Huawei stole trade secrets from US carrier T-Mobile beginning in 2012. Huawei also allegedly offered bonuses to employees who stole confidential information from companies. In addition, a 13-count indictment charged four defendants, including Huawei and Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou, with financial fraud. The indicted defendants also include affiliates Huawei USA and Skycom.

"The charges unsealed today clearly allege that Huawei intentionally conspired to steal the intellectual property of an American company in an attempt to undermine the free and fair global marketplace," said FBI Director Christopher Wray in a statement. "To the detriment of American ingenuity, Huawei continually disregarded the laws of the United States in the hopes of gaining an unfair economic advantage.""

Video and audio from my closing keynote at Friday's Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain; BoingBoing, January 27, 2019

Cory Doctorow, BoingBoing; Video and audio from my closing keynote at Friday's Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain

"On Friday, hundreds of us gathered at the Internet Archive, at the invitation of Creative Commons, to celebrate the Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain, just weeks after the first works entered the American public domain in twenty years.
 
I had the honor of delivering the closing keynote, after a roster of astounding speakers. It was a big challenge and I was pretty nervous, but on reviewing the saved livestream, I'm pretty proud of how it turned out.

Proud enough that I've ripped the audio and posted it to my podcast feed; the video for the keynote is on the Archive and mirrored to Youtube.

The whole event's livestream is also online, and boy do I recommend it."

Copyright Office identifies visual arts copyright problems, solutions; Lexology, January 24, 2019

Thompson Coburn LLP - Mark Sableman, Lexology; Copyright Office identifies visual arts copyright problems, solutions

 

"Our forms are antiquated and difficult to use. Our definition of “publication” is important but hard to understand and apply. Our process for enforcing rights is tedious, costly, and time consuming.

 

Those are key takeaways from a report by the Copyright Office to Congress about visual works copyrights. And that’s not all of the bad news. In addition to deficiencies in its own processes, the Copyright Office reported the hardly surprising conclusion that people on the Internet often misuse copyrighted works and mislead users about copyright...

 

The report, titled “Copyright and Visual Works: The Legal Landscape of Opportunities and Challenges,” concerns a recent “holistic analysis of the copyright landscape in which visual artists must work.” Based on comments from industry and the public, the Copyright Office identified three major challenges for visual artist copyrights: the registration process, licensing, and enforcement."

Shazam! Vs. Captain Marvel: The Bizarre Battle Over a Name; Comic Book Resources, January 27, 2019

Brian Cronin, Comic Book Resources; Shazam! Vs. Captain Marvel: The Bizarre Battle Over a Name

"Eventually, most fans will only known [sic] the hero formerly known as Captain Marvel as Shazam. It's a bit of a shame, but that's how the intellectual property rights fell."

How the public domain offers new life to these poetry classics; PBS NewsHour, January 21, 2019

PBS NewsHour; How the public domain offers new life to these poetry classics

"Literary works in the public domain have inspired countless homages, spinoffs and reimaginings. Broadway hit musical “Wicked” was based on Frank L. Baum’s “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,” which entered the public domain in 1956. New York Times bestseller “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” mixed 2009’s undead craze with Jane Austen’s 18th-century romantic comedy. Tony-award winner Lin Manuel Miranda used several public domain works in “Hamilton,” avoiding copyright infringement for his contemporary take on one of the Founding Fathers.

For more on the various ways the public domain serves today’s poets, writers and other literary fans, the PBS NewsHour interviewed Adam Green, editor-in-chief of The Public Domain Review, Robert Casper, head of the Library of Congress’ Poetry and Literature Center, and Karyn A. Temple, director of the library’s U.S. Copyright Office. 

These conversations have been combined and edited for length. A list of works entering the public domain in 2019 is available here."

Viral Is Still Copyrighted, Even to Learn Where Trump Is; Lexology, January 18, 2019

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP - Joseph Myles and Margaret A. Esquenet, Lexology; Viral Is Still Copyrighted, Even to Learn Where Trump Is

"While attending his friend’s wedding at the Trump National Golf Club in New Jersey in June 2017, Jonathan Otto took a photograph of a certain wedding crasher: the president himself...

The case continues towards trial, but with a number of the most important issues now decided in Otto’s favor."

Trademark Fight Over Vulgar Term’s ‘Phonetic Twin’ Heads to Supreme Court; The New York Times, January 21, 2019

Adam Liptak, The New York Times; Trademark Fight Over Vulgar Term’s ‘Phonetic Twin’ Heads to Supreme Court

"The Supreme Court apparently thinks the question is more complicated, as it agreed this month to hear the government’s appeal. If nothing else, the court can use Mr. Brunetti’s case to sort out just what it meant to say in the 2017 decision, which ruled for an Asian-American dance-rock band called the Slants. (The decision also effectively allowed the Washington Redskins football team to register its trademarks.)

The justices were unanimous in ruling that the prohibition on disparaging trademarks violated the First Amendment. But they managed to split 4 to 4 in most of their reasoning, making it hard to analyze how the decision applies in the context of the ban on scandalous terms."

Autocomplete suggestions: Did you mean 'copyright infringement'?; Lexology, January 10, 2019

MinterEllison - Nadia Braad and Ruby Ramachandran, Lexology; Autocomplete suggestions: Did you mean 'copyright infringement'?

"We won't be likely to see a Court consider this particular topic until the value of the copyright is sufficient for a copyright owner to challenge a search engine over the autocomplete suggestions. In the fast paced world of technology, this may not be far away."

Trump’s bizarre statement on China dishonors us all; The Washington Post, January 11, 2019

Dana Milbank, The Washington Post; Trump’s bizarre statement on China dishonors us all

"Asked an unrelated question on the White House South Lawn on Thursday, Trump volunteered a comparison between Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) — and the leaders of the People’s Republic of China.

“I find China, frankly, in many ways, to be far more honorable than Cryin’ Chuck and Nancy. I really do,” he said. “I think that China is actually much easier to deal with than the opposition party.”

China, honorable?

China, which is holding a million members of religious minorities in concentration camps for “reeducation” by force?

China, which, according to Trump’s own FBI director, is, by far, the leading perpetrator of technology theft and espionage against the United States and is “using illegal methods” to “replace the U.S. as the world’s leading superpower”?

China, whose state-sponsored hackers were indicted just three weeks ago and accused of a 12-year campaign of cyberattacks on this and other countries?

China, whose ruling Communist Party has caused the extermination of tens of millions of people since the end of World War II, through government-induced famine, the ideological purges of the Cultural Revolution, and in mowing down reformers in Tiananmen Square?

Trump has a strange sense of honor. In April, he bestowed the same adjective on the world’s most oppressive leader, North Korea’s nuclear-armed dictator: “Kim Jong Un, he really has been very open and I think very honorable from everything we’re seeing.”

Now, the president is declaring that China’s dictatorship, by far the world’s biggest international criminal and abuser of human rights and operator of its most extensive police state, is more honorable than his political opponents in the United States.

In Trump’s view, your opponents are your enemies — and your actual enemies are your friends. How can you negotiate with a man who thinks like this?"

A Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain by Internet Archive and Creative Commons: January 25, 2019

A Grand Re-Opening of the Public Domain

by Internet Archive and Creative Commons

 

 

"Description 

Please join us on Friday, January 25, 2019 for a grand day celebrating the public domain!
Co-hosted by the Internet Archive and Creative Commons, this celebration will feature a keynote addresses by Lawrence Lessig and Cory Doctorow, lightning talks, demos, multimedia displays and more to mark the “re-opening” of the public domain in the United States. The event will take place at the Internet Archive in San Francisco.

Schedule of Events:

10am: Doors & Registration
10-11:45: Interactive public domain demos and project stations with organizations including Creative Commons, Internet Archive, Wikipedia, Authors Alliance, Electronic Frontier Foundation, California Digital Library, Center for the Study of the Public Domain, LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired, the Cleveland Art Museum, and many more!
11:45-1pm: Lunch on your own in the Richmond District
1pm-6pm: Program of keynote speakers, lightning talks and panels highlighting the value and importance of the public domain
6pm-7:30pm: Reception

Speakers/Panelists Include:

Lawrence Lessig - Harvard Law Professor
Cory Doctorow - Author & Co-editor, Boing-Boing
Pam Samuelson - Berkeley Law Professor
Paul Soulellis - Artist & Rhode Island School of Design Professor
Jamie Boyle - Duke Law Professor & Founder, Center for the Study of the Public Domain
Brewster Kahle - Founder & Digital Librarian, Internet Archive
Corynne McSherry - Legal Director, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Ryan Merkley - CEO, Creative Commons
Jennifer Urban - Berkeley Law Professor
Joseph C. Gratz - Partner, Durie Tangri
Jane Park - Director of Product and Research, Creative Commons
Cheyenne Hohman - Director, Free Music Archive
Ben Vershbow - Director, Community Programs, Wikimedia
Jennifer Jenkins - Director, Center for the Study of the Public Domain
Rick Prelinger - Founder, Prelinger Archives
Amy Mason - LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Paul Keller - Communia Association
Michael Wolfe - Duke Lecturing Fellow, Center for the Study of the Public Domain
Daniel Schacht - Co-chair of the Intellectual Property Practice Group, Donahue Fitzgerald LLP"

Will the world embrace Plan S, the radical proposal to mandate open access to science papers?; Science, January 3, 2019

Tania Rabesandratana, Science; Will the world embrace Plan S, the radical proposal to mandate open access to science papers?

""In the OA movement, it seems to a lot of people that you have to choose a road: green or gold or diamond," says Colleen Campbell, director of the OA2020 initiative at the Max Planck Digital Library in Munich, Germany, referring to various styles of OA. "Publishers are sitting back laughing at us while we argue about different shades" instead of focusing on a shared goal of complete, immediate OA. Because of its bold, stringent requirements, she and others think Plan S can galvanize advocates to align their efforts to shake up the publishing system...

"The combined weight of Europe and China is probably enough to move the system," says astrophysicist Luke Drury, of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies and the lead author of a cautiously supportive response to Plan S by All European Academies, a federation of European academies of sciences and humanities.

If Plan S does succeed in bringing about a fairer publishing system, he says, a transition to worldwide OA is sure to follow. "Somebody has to take the lead, and I'm pleased that it looks like it's coming from Europe.""

January 1, 2019 is (finally) Public Domain Day: Works from 1923 are open to all!; Center for the Study of the Public Domain, January 2019

Center for the Study of the Public Domain;

January 1, 2019 is (finally) Public Domain Day: Works from 1923 are open to all!

"For the first time in over 20 years, on January 1, 2019, published works will enter the US public domain.1 Works from 1923 will be free for all to use and build upon, without permission or fee. They include dramatic films such as The Ten Commandments, and comedies featuring Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Harold Lloyd. There are literary works by Robert Frost, Aldous Huxley, and Edith Wharton, the “Charleston” song, and more. And remember, this has not happened for over 20 years. Why? Works from 1923 were set to go into the public domain in 1999, after a 75-year copyright term. But in 1998 Congress hit a two-decade pause button and extended their copyright term for 20 years, giving works published between 1923 and 1977 an expanded term of 95 years.2
But now the drought is over. How will people celebrate this trove of cultural material? Google Books will offer the full text of books from that year, instead of showing only snippet views or authorized previews. The Internet Archive will add books, movies, music, and more to its online library.

HathiTrust has made over 50,000 titles from 1923 available in its digital library. Community theaters are planning screenings of the films. Students will be free to adapt and publicly perform the music. Because these works are in the public domain, anyone can make them available, where you can rediscover and enjoy them. (Empirical studies have shown that public domain books are less expensive, available in more editions and formats, and more likely to be in print—see here, here, and here.) In addition, the expiration of copyright means that you’re free to use these materials, for education, for research, or for creative endeavors—whether it’s translating the books, making your own versions of the films, or building new music based on old classics.

Here are some of the works that will be entering the public domain in 2019. A fuller (but still partial) listing of over a thousand works that we have researched can be found here. (You can click on some of the titles below to get the newly public domain works.)"

Supreme Court to decide if trademark protection can be denied to ‘scandalous’ brands; The Washington Post, January 4, 2019

Robert Barnes, The Washington Post; Supreme Court to decide if trademark protection can be denied to ‘scandalous’ brands

"The Supreme Court agreed Friday to review a new front in the battle over free speech and will decide whether trademark protection can be refused to brands the federal government finds vulgar or lewd.

The case involves a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to deny trademark registration to a clothing line called FUCT.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit struck down the century-old ban on protecting “scandalous” and “immoral” trademarks as a First Amendment violation, and the Department of Justice wants the Supreme Court to reverse the decision...

The case,Iancu v. Brunetti , will probably be heard at the Supreme Court in April."

Freed From Copyright, These Classic Works Are Yours To Adapt; NPR, January 5, 2019

Milton Guevara, NPR; Freed From Copyright, These Classic Works Are Yours To Adapt

""Copyright has been overextended so many times, largely at the behest of major copyright holders," says author Naomi Novik. "Even though what that actually does is inhibit people from creating new works and sharing these older works." Novik is a founding member of the Organization for Transformative Works, a nonprofit that focuses on preserving fan fiction and art — that is, work created by fans, based on characters and worlds from their favorite written works, film, and TV, which can occasionally come into conflict with copyright law.

"For a character to live, that character has to belong to the audience," says Novik. "Works of art are meant to nourish our collective understanding; they're meant to nourish our conversation." 

Duke Law's entire list of works that entered the public domain this year can be found here."

'The drought is over': mass US copyright expiry brings flood of works into public domain; The Guardian, January 2, 2019

Alison Flood, The Guardian;

'The drought is over': mass US copyright expiry brings flood of works into public domain

 

"“The drought is over,” proclaims Duke Law School’s Center for the Public Domain, highlighting some of the works which are now available royalty-free, by authors from Edgar Rice Burroughs to Kahlil Gibran, PG Wodehouse to DH Lawrence, Edith Wharton to EE Cummings. It’s not only books: copyright in the US is also expiring on a host of films, paintings and music.

 

“The public domain has been frozen in time for 20 years, and we’re reaching the 20-year thaw,” the center’s director Jennifer Jenkins told the Smithsonian. The magazine predicted that the release’s impact on culture and creativity could be huge, because “we have never seen such a mass entry into the public domain in the digital age”. Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive, told the Smithsonian: “We have shortchanged a generation. The 20th century is largely missing from the internet.”"

We Are! ... Happy Valley? Penn State applies for trademark on moniker; The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, January 2, 2019

Bill Schackner, The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; We Are! ... Happy Valley? Penn State applies for trademark on moniker

"Josh Gerben, a trademark attorney in Washington, D.C., tweeted about the Penn State application Dec. 28, calling it a “trademark ‘land grab.’”

He said Happy Valley should remain in the public domain, since the university did not create the expression and the words are used broadly in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. He said others should be able to profit from it.

“It’s a generally accepted term for a geographic area in which the university happens to reside,” he said. “It seems out of place for the university to come in and say they should be the exclusive provider of Happy Valley clothing throughout the country. That’s exactly what they are asking to do.”"

Mickey Mouse and Batman will soon be public domain—here’s what that means; Ars Technica, January 1, 2019

Timothy B. Lee, Ars Technica; Mickey Mouse and Batman will soon be public domain—here’s what that means

"Until recently, I assumed that the same interest groups would try to extend copyright terms again in 2018. But the political climate for copyright legislation has changed radically over the last 20 years.

A year ago, Ars Technica broke the news that three of the nation's most powerful rights holder groups in the country, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, and the Authors Guild, were not even going to try to pass legislation extending copyrights.

"It's not something we are pursuing," an RIAA spokesman told me.

The reason was simple, Grimmelmann argues: they knew they weren't going to win."

Why Mickey Mouse’s 1998 copyright extension probably won’t happen again; Ars Technica, January 8, 2018

Timothy B. Lee, Ars Technica; Why Mickey Mouse’s 1998 copyright extension probably won’t happen again

"Most of the public considered copyright to be a boring subject with little relevance to their daily lives, so there was little grassroots interest in the issue. Karjala hoped that professional associations of librarians and historians—which had traditionally been important advocates for the public interest on copyright issues—would help stop the bill. But the legislation had so much momentum that these groups decided to settle for minor changes to the legislation. So the bill wound up passing without a significant fight.

The rise of the Internet has totally changed the political landscape on copyright issues. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is much larger than it was in 1998. Other groups, including Public Knowledge, didn't even exist 20 years ago. Internet companies—especially Google—have become powerful opponents of expanding copyright protections."

New Life for Old Classics, as Their Copyrights Run Out; The New York Times, December 29, 2018

Alexandra Alter, The New York Times; New Life for Old Classics, as Their Copyrights Run Out

"This coming year marks the first time in two decades that a large body of copyrighted works will lose their protected status — a shift that will have profound consequences for publishers and literary estates, which stand to lose both money and creative control.

But it will also be a boon for readers, who will have more editions to choose from, and for writers and other artists who can create new works based on classic stories without getting hit with an intellectual property lawsuit...

 

Still, many scholars and legal experts argue that American copyright law, which is mind-numbingly complex, has skewed toward enriching companies and the heirs of writers and artists at the expense of the public. When the first Copyright Act was passed in the United States in 1790, the maximum term was 28 years. Over the decades, lawmakers repeatedly prolonged the terms, which now stretch to over a century for many works. “It’s worse than the tax code,” said Rebecca Tushnet, an intellectual property expert at Harvard Law School. “The copyright term is way too long now.”"

China's Supreme Court to take on intellectual property cases; Reuters, December 29, 2018

Reuters; China's Supreme Court to take on intellectual property cases

"Intellectual property rights cases can from next month be taken to China’s Supreme Court, the government said on Saturday, as the country seeks to strengthen protections in the face of complaints from the United States about the issue."

Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos. That’s a Problem for Video Game Developers.; The New York Times, December 27, 2018

Jason M. Bailey, The New York Times; Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos. That’s a Problem for Video Game Developers.

"Take-Two has argued in court papers that Solid Oak’s tattoos are seen rarely, fleetingly and hazily in the NBA 2K games, but the judge rejected a motion for dismissal in March.

A verdict for either side would set an important precedent on how the owner of a tattoo copyright can enforce it, said Yolanda M. King, an associate law professor at Northern Illinois University who has extensively studied the issue."

Disney trademarked ‘Hakuna Matata.’ A new petition demands the company drop it.; The Washington Post, December 19, 2018

Sonia Rao , The Washington Post; Disney trademarked ‘Hakuna Matata.’ A new petition demands the company drop it.

"The company has received similar criticism before."

Hakuna Matata™? Can Disney Actually Trademark That?; The New York Times, December 20, 2018

Kimiko de Freytas-Tamura, The New York Times; Hakuna Matata™? Can Disney Actually Trademark That?

"Trademark experts said the talk of colonialism and robbery was overwrought, and that the trademarking of phrases, particularly those from other languages, is commonplace.

“People talk about appropriation,” said Phillip Johnson, a professor of commercial law at Cardiff Law School in Wales and a specialist on intellectual property law, “but a trademark is all about appropriation of language within a narrow commercial sphere, outside that space people are free to use the language as they wish.”

“What’s difficult about this case is whether it was a sensible commercial decision for the Disney brand, rather than whether, legally, the mark should or should not be registered,” he added. “The question is, does their brand benefit from having trademark or does it get damaged from bad publicity from having that trademark?”"

Video, Andy Sheehan, CBS KDKA; Ohio Clothing Company Seeks To Trademark ‘Yinzer’ For T-Shirts, CBS KDKA, December 21, 2018

Video, Andy Sheehan, CBS KDKA; Ohio Clothing Company Seeks To Trademark ‘Yinzer’ For T-Shirts   

"KDKA’s Andy Sheehan: “Are you a yinzer?” 

Grbach: “Yeah, I think so, yeah. I think deep down I am, absolutely.”

Sheehan: “You don’t use the word yinz.”

Grbach: “I tell my kids not to, but sometimes it slips out.”

For the First Time in More Than 20 Years, Copyrighted Works Will Enter the Public Domain; Smithsonian Magazine, January 2019

Glenn Fleishman, Smithsonian Magazine;

For the First Time in More Than 20 Years, Copyrighted Works Will Enter the Public Domain

 

"At midnight on New Year’s Eve, all works first published in the United States in 1923 will enter the public domain. It has been 21 years since the last mass expiration of copyright in the U.S."

The Second Circuit Shuts Down Resale of Digital Music Files in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi, Inc., Lexology, December 18, 2018

Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - Samuel J. Zeitlin and Bruce Rich, Lexology; The Second Circuit Shuts Down Resale of Digital Music Files in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi, Inc.

 

"If you purchase a copy of music in physical form--like a CD or vinyl record-- you own your copy even though you do not own the underlying songs. Although the law reserves to the copyright owner the right to make more copies, she cannot stop you from selling your copy or giving it away. This rule is called the right of first sale, and it enables all secondhand sales of copyrighted material, from the smallest used bookstore to eBay and Amazon Marketplace. The right of first sale began as judge-made law in the early 20th century, and today is part of the copyright statute at 17 U.S.C. 109(a). In technical terms, Section 109(a) creates an exception for the owners of legal copies to the copyright owner's exclusive right to distribute her work, although not to her exclusive right to reproduce her work.

 

But what happens if you purchase a digital music file? Digital copying unravels the balance between the rights of copyright owners and customers set by the first sale doctrine. Section 109(a) only allows the owner of a copy to distribute it, not to make more copies. In a digital environment, however, distributing a file is done by making a copy of that file in a new location. When the distinction between copying and distributing collapses, is it still possible to exercise the right of first sale?

 

The Second Circuit has just confronted this issue in its December 12, 2018 ruling on the legality of ReDigi, an online marketplace designed to let people resell digital music files purchased from iTunes. In a unanimous decision in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi, Inc. penned by the Second Circuit's preeminent copyright expert, Judge Pierre Leval, the court upheld the conclusion of the district court that ReDigi's business model violated the law."

Did a Typo Accidentally Make Rudolph's TV Special Public Domain?; Comic Book Resources, December 15, 2018

Brian Cronin, Comic Book Resources; Did a Typo Accidentally Make Rudolph's TV Special Public Domain?

"Not so fast.

You see, the main character in the film, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, WAS under copyright (in one of the sweetest stories of corporate generosity ever, Montgomery Ward gave the copyright to the character to the employee who created Rudolph as part of a store Christmas giveaway). Rudolph is also currently protected by federal trademark, meaning that you couldn't name any project "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" without permission from the Rudolph trademark owners (I think there's a company specifically set up just to handle this Rudolph-related intellectual property stuff). Similarly, all of the songs in the film were independently copyrighted, so you couldn't use any of them."

Gift Guide For The Intellectual Property Geek; Above The Law, December 13, 2018

Krista L. Cox, Above The Law; Gift Guide For The Intellectual Property Geek

"Still looking for a holiday gift for the IP geek who loves all things copyright, patent, and trademark?Try one of these gift ideas below, some of which were the subject of litigation (including in other countries)."

It’s not a trade war with China. It’s a tech war.; The Washington Post, December 14, 2018

Michael Morell and David Kris, The Washington Post; It’s not a trade war with China. It’s a tech war.

"Michael Morell, a Post contributing columnist, is a former deputy director and twice acting director of the Central Intelligence Agency. David Kris is a former assistant attorney general for national security and co-founder of Culper Partners consulting firm.

The United States is in an escalating technological cold war with China. It’s not centered on tariffs and trade, which President Trump often cites; instead, it involves both China’s use of technology to steal information and the theft of technology itself."

Indigenous Knowledge Misappropriation: The Case Of The Zia Sun Symbol Explained At WIPO; Intellectual Property Watch, December 11, 2018

Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch; Indigenous Knowledge Misappropriation: The Case Of The Zia Sun Symbol Explained At WIPO

"The three panellists mentioned the importance of the United Nations Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [pdf], and in particular Article 31, which asserts the right of indigenous peoples to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, TK and TCEs,  and the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over their cultural heritage, TK, and TCEs.

Commenting on the Zia case, June Lorenzo, a lawyer advocating in tribal and domestic courts and legislative and international human rights bodies, said in the late 1890s, Zia was at a very vulnerable point, as many other tribes were. A number of archaeologists came and took “what they could because they thought we were going to disappear as a civilisation,” she said, noting that the stolen pot was repatriated in 2000 or 2002.

In 1925, when the Zia symbol was adopted by the state of New Mexico, the Zia were not even considered as citizens of the United States, she said, and could not vote. “So the idea that they should have objected to this [ the use of the symbol] in 1925 … is just absurd.”"

Fortnight [sic] Sued Over Swiped Dance Move; Forbes, December 11, 2018

Oliver Herzfeld, Forbes; Fortnight [sic] Sued Over Swiped Dance Move

"Rapper 2 Milly recently filed a lawsuit against Epic Games, the maker of Fortnite Battle Royale. Essentially, 2 Milly claims Epic engaged in copyright infringement by stealing his dance move, the “Milly Rock,” renaming the move “Swipe It” and offering if for sale in Fortnite. The question is, are dance moves copyrightable?"

Drama in South Africa Leads to Passing Fair Use; infojustice.org, December 6, 2018

Sean Flynn, infojustice.org; Drama in South Africa Leads to Passing Fair Use

"It was a day of copyright drama in the South African Parliament on the anniversary of Nelson Mandela’s passing...

After passing a new performers protection bill, more MPs from the ANC were whipped to join the chamber and the Copyright Amendment Bill was passed on a second vote.

The process is far from over. Now the bill must pass through the National Council of Provinces and then return to the National Assembly to rectify any changes before being signed into law by the President.  But the passage was a major victory for those in South Africa who have been working for over 20 years to update its user rights and other provisions."

What Is Intellectual Property, and Does China Steal It?; Bloomberg, December 4, 2018

Grant Clark, Bloomberg; What Is Intellectual Property, and Does China Steal It?

"7. Is this a new gripe by the U.S.?

It’s a longstanding issue. That 2011 report by the U.S. International Trade Commission estimated that U.S. IP-intensive firms lost $48 billion in 2009 because of Chinese infringements. A 2016 USTR’s report highlighted serious problems, especially concerning the theft of trade secrets. "Offenders in many cases continue to operate with impunity," the report said."

Controlled Digital Lending Concept Gains Ground; Library Journal, November 15, 2018

Matt Enis, Library Journal; Controlled Digital Lending Concept Gains Ground

"A White Paper on Controlled Digital Lending of Library Books, by Courtney and coauthor David R. Hansen, associate university librarian for Research, Collections and Scholarly Communications, Duke University Libraries, was written in support of the position statement, and delves further into “the legal and policy rationales for the [CDL] process…as well as a variety of risk factors and practical considerations that can guide libraries seeking to implement such lending…. Our goal is to help libraries and their lawyers become more comfortable with the concept by more fully explaining the legal rationale for controlled digital lending, as well as situations in which this rationale is the strongest.”

The white paper notes that the Internet Archive’s “CDL-like” system has been in operation for eight years, and that the Georgetown Law Library operates a CDL service. But for the library field, the concept is still relatively new.

“This is how things start,” said [Kyle K. ] Courtney [copyright advisor for Harvard University]. “You put out a position statement, you back it up with a white paper, and you see the conversations that happen.” As libraries establish programs and platforms, use cases and best practices begin to emerge."

'The Pirate Bay of Science' Continues to Get Attacked Around the World; Motherboard, December 3, 2018

Karl Bode, Motherboard; 'The Pirate Bay of Science' Continues to Get Attacked Around the World

"The problem for publishers and their courtroom attacks on Sci-Hub is that they only draw additional attention to the need for open access to this data (aka the Streisand Effect). As a result, several prominent European research councils recently announced a open access publishing effort intended to more seriously address the problem at hand."

Copyright transfer, assignment and licensing in the United States; Lexology, October 29, 2018

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP - Jeff C. Dodd, Jonathan D. Reichman and Susanna P. Lichter, Lexology; Copyright transfer, assignment and licensing in the United States

"Transfer, assignment and licensing

Transfer and assignment 

What rules, restrictions and procedures govern the transfer and assignment of copyright? Are any formalities required to secure the legal effect of the transfer or assignment?

Any or all of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights or any subdivision of those rights may be transferred, but the transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by either the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorised agent. However, the written transfer does not need to be made at the time of assignment, and a later written document confirming the agreement is sufficient to prove the assignment. Transfer of a right on a non-exclusive basis does not require a written agreement. A copyright may also be conveyed by operation of law. Additionally, it may be bequeathed by will or pass as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession. Copyright is a personal property right and is subject to the various state laws and regulations that govern the ownership, inheritance or transfer of personal property as well as terms of contracts or conduct of business. The recording of a transfer with the Copyright Office is not required to make the transfer valid between the parties; however, it provides certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties. To bring an infringement suit in court, a copyright owner needs proof of an unbroken chain of title going back to the author of the work."

3 Types of Documents Every Company Needs to Have in Place; Lexology, October 23, 2018

Cozen O'Connor - Jeremiah G. Garvey and Seth Popick, Lexology; 3 Types of Documents Every Company Needs to Have in Place

"Documents for Protection of the Company’s Intellectual Property

In addition to formal employment terms and conditions and formal consulting and advisor agreements, the most important agreement for most emerging companies to have shortly after formation is a non-disclosure agreement. This agreement is usually entered into with unrelated third parties who may come in contact with the company’s proprietary information and is intended to protect the company’s rights to its intellectual property."

Supreme Court hands Fox News another win in copyright case against TVEyes monitoring service; The Washington Post, December 3, 2018

Erik Wemple, The Washington Post; Supreme Court hands Fox News another win in copyright case against TVEyes monitoring service

"The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case could leave media critics scrambling. How to fact-check the latest gaffe on “Hannity”? Did Brian Kilmeade really say that? To be sure, cable-news watchers commonly post the most extravagant cable-news moments on Twitter and other social media — a democratic activity that lies outside of the TVEyes ruling, because it’s not a money-making thing. Yet Fox News watchdogs use TVEyes and other services to soak in the full context surrounding those widely circulated clips, and that task is due to get more complicated. That said, services may still provide transcripts without infringing the Fox News copyright."