Original news and analysis on international IP policy
Music, movie, and television companies suffered a major defeat yesterday, when the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. The ruling will lead to a flood of new copyright infringement suits against these content companies, according to many experts. And content companies may not be the only losers.
The United States Supreme Court yesterday issued two rulings that were bad news for patent assertion entities, or "patent trolls". Thanks to these decisions, trolls and other patentees could be on the hook for millions in fees whenever they bring frivolous patent infringement suits.
The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in a contentious copyright suit that could affect the continued viability of broadcast television, cable TV, and cloud-storage services like DropBox, Box and Apple’s iCloud. And it is far from clear how the court will rule in American Broadcasting Companies v. Aereo, Inc.
The 9th Circuit’s recent decision in Garcia v. Google has sparked outrage among many internet businesses, media organisations, civil rights groups, and copyright experts. They assert the ruling significantly alters US law in a manner that will greatly restrict free speech. But a minority of experts say there is nothing to fear.
When “Innocence of Muslims” first appeared online, the video provoked outrage among millions of Muslims around the world. Now the consternation has spread to many copyright experts, internet firms, news organisations, and entertainment companies, who assert that a recent 9th Circuit decision about the movie makes a major change in US copyright law, with terrible consequences for the internet, media, and free speech. Others state that the ruling makes no change at all in US law.
It began last May, when a tiny state in the United States launched a novel legal attack against a notorious patent troll. Other states and the federal government soon followed, all asserting that the troll’s efforts to licence its patents violated consumer protection laws. At first, this new legal strategy produced some significant victories. Many experts and government officials embraced consumer protection law as an important new tool against patent trolls. But a recent court ruling has cast doubt on the future of this once-promising strategy.
2013 was an awkward year in the United States for so-called “patent trolls.” These companies, whose primary business is monetising their patents through licensing and litigation, faced growing criticism from academics, business executives, and US government officials. 2014 could prove even worse for trolls: America’s Congress, courts and executive branch are now considering various measures that would make patent trolling more difficult. And those are just some of the major changes that are likely to roil the US IP system this year.
When it comes to software-related inventions, US patent law is a confused mess. So it was no surprise that, in early December, the United States Supreme Court announced it would weigh in on the matter. The court granted certiorari in Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank in order to decide when software-related inventions are patentable subject matter. But given the complicated technology and the high court’s confusing precedents in this area, many experts fear that the ruling in Alice will bring little clarity to this area of the law.
On 5 November, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could undermine America’s ability to carry out its treaty obligations. The case casts a shadow over the country’s power to implement a wide variety of international agreements, including trade and intellectual property agreements.
The US Supreme Court yesterday let stand an important appellate court ruling on copyright law, giving a boost to artists who repurpose others’ works and to supporters of fair use rights. This decision, however, upset many copyright owners, who fear it will allow their works to be used without payment and without their consent.
The US government shutdown is now in its second week, causing more and more of the country’s intellectual property regime to grind to a halt. The shutdown’s effects also are rippling overseas, hindering US efforts to negotiate two major international trade deals containing significant IP provisions.
Patent assertion entities in the United States have done well from software patents. These companies, which some call “patent trolls,” have garnered a clear majority of their revenues by licensing software patents and suing those who refuse to purchase licences. But these companies’ reliance on software patents may be coming to an end. In recent years, these companies are increasingly exploiting business method patents, and by doing so are targeting a much larger range of businesses, according to a recently released study.