Amazon “Nonsense” Marks
What’s up with all the gibberish brand names on Amazon? And why is it a huge problem for the USPTO?
<em>Steven Madden v. Ganni</em>: A Dupes Clash
This blog examines the proliferation of dupes in the fashion space, how consumers have reacted, and how intellectual property law in the U.S. has attempted to regulate it. Steven Madden v. Ganni exemplifies the failure of traditional IP law to regulate dupes and potential solutions to this rising circumstance.
AI, Copyright, and the Courts: <em> Bartz v. Anthropic </em>
How the court clarified fair-use boundaries and accelerated the rise of licensing markets for AI training data.
All I Want for Christmas Is… to Stop Getting Sued
Mariah Carey is being sued for copyright infringement relating to lyrics in her infamous song All I Want for Christmas is You—for the third time.
<em> Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Tech. Int'l Ltd., Inc. </em>
A recent Federal Circuit decision has narrowed the public disclosure requirement for obtaining patents. The requirement now limits what qualifies as “reasonably available to the public” under the prior art requirement for obtaining a patent. A private sale was not found to meet the narrowed requirement.
Redefining GI Distinctiveness to Aid Consumer Protections and Cultural Cooperation
This blog aims to address current issues facing foreign Geographical Indicator (GI) trademark recognition by the USPTO. It also seeks to explain why the USPTO should adopt a wider stance and recognize foreign GI marks more readily.
<em> Tube-Mac Indus., Inc. v. Campbell </em>
The Federal Circuit Court affirmed an Eastern District Court of Virginia’s decision to mandate a correction of inventorship of U.S. Patent 9,376,049 (the “’049 patent”) which added Gary Mackay and Dan Hewson as named inventors.
Ex’s and Oh No’s: Bad Bunny’s Ex Sues for Copyright Infringement
Puerto Rican rapper Bad Bunny was sued for copyright infringement by his ex-girlfriend who claims that her voice is used without her consent in two songs: “Pa Ti” and “Dos Mil 16.”
<em> AlexSam, Inc., v. MasterCard Int’l Inc. </em>
AlexSam filed a breach of contract claim against MasterCard. The District Court held that the claim was prohibited under the parties’ covenant not to sue. The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded based on non-ambiguity in license agreements.
A Collision of Precedents: Assessing the <em> LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC </em> Patent Case
For the first time since 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sat en banc to review a patent case. LKQ Corp v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC marks a pivotal battle over design patents and spotlights the debate surrounding existing Court precedents.
<em>Great Concepts, LLC v. Chutter, Inc.</em>
In Great Concepts, LLC v. Chutter, Inc., Chutter challenged the validity of Great Concept’s mark, claiming “DANTANNA’S” confuses their mark “DAN TANA,” challenging incontestability, and arguing that “DANTANN’S” was obtained by a false affidavit, so Great Concept’s mark is therefore fraudulent.
No Right to Copyright for AI
The owner of an artificial intelligence filed a suit against the United States Copyright Office for denying his application for a piece of visual art created by the AI. This case has recently been appealed and will be a landmark decision regarding the rights of AI and their owners to the work that is created by AI.
Get a Kick Out of This
Nike filed two patent infringement lawsuits on November 6, one against New Balance in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts and another against Skechers in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, concerning its Flyknit shoewear technology. Nike sued multiple other global brands such as Puma, Adidas, and Lululemon regarding this same technology in the past five years.
<em>Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Life Scis. Ltd.</em>
The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trials and Appeals Board’s decision on the validity of Teleflex’s patent but refused to address whether an in vivo performance of an in vivo method is required to show actual reduction to practice.
Industry-Specific Patent Policy
Patent scholars have long called for industry-specific patent policy; however, these policies must support cross-functional collaboration amongst different technologies to continue to foster innovation.
<em>Actelion Pharms. LTD v. Mylan Pharms. Inc.</em>
The Federal Circuit Court issued a precedential decision vacating the District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia’s claim construction order and remanded the case to consider extrinsic evidence and its impact on claim construction.
<em>Spireon, Inc. v. Flex Ltd.</em>
The Federal Circuit ruled that the TTAB failed to properly weigh the conceptual and commercial strength of a mark by not considering third-party registrations and by placing the burden to establish non-use on the applicant.