Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The World Intellectual Property Organization received a record 3,447 domain name dispute cases from trademark owners in 2018 – up 12 percent from the previous year. In addition, there was a 15 percent increase in alternative dispute resolution cases, according to WIPO.
Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium. Alas, that longstanding legal principle – where there’s a right, there’s a remedy – doesn’t apply to IP owners in the US. Thanks to several Supreme Court rulings interpreting the US Constitution, owners of patents have no recourse when their IP is infringed by US states. Copyright owners now face the same fate, unless the Supreme Court reverses a recent 4th Circuit decision.
NEW YORK -- Artificial intelligence, robots, and the law, are all changing a rapid pace. A panel of experts at a recent event at Fordham Law School discussed latest developments and signs of the limits of the law when applied to AI areas like facial recognition, automated weapons systems, and financial technology.
As the blockbuster animated movie Lego Movie 2 gets set to hit screens in the United States this weekend, the World Intellectual Property Organization had a release of its own: a domain dispute ruling against a pirate website purporting to offer a free version of the film for download ahead of the release.
Dean Pinkert writes: The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has been open about its view of the difficulties faced by US companies who claim – generally anonymously – that they have been forced to transfer technology to Chinese entities: “The fact that China systematically implements its technology transfer regime in informal and indirect ways makes it ‘just as effective [as written requirements], but almost impossible to prosecute.’” As I explain in this article, I believe such informality is not merely a barrier to prosecutions; it also presents conceptual challenges for US trade negotiators as they attempt to craft effective means to address the concerns of US companies doing business in China.
The US started 2019 with a bang. Its Supreme Court has just announced a major patent decision, and more big developments could arrive in the coming months. Here are some of the top issues to watch this year.
Russ Genet writes: Protecting patents can be expensive, especially for companies competing in a global arena where aggressive startups, cut-rate competitors and industrial giants are all vying for the next big innovation to snatch up or move to market. However, failing to protect patents can be equally expensive. It is estimated that patent theft costs the US economy billions each year. And for the corporate patent owner, failing to defend patent rights today can significantly limit their value in the future.
Namrata Chadha, of K&S Partners, a Tier 1 Indian law firm, discusses various crucial aspects relating to patenting of selection inventions in India, especially in pharmaceuticals and chemicals. Summary: The patenting of selection inventions is not plain sailing in India. The patentability of such inventions must be determined in accordance with the general provisions of the Indian Patents Act, as there is no separate provision for the same in the Act. Of the said general provisions, the assessment of inventive step and testing under section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act can be perceived as the most critical to patentability of selected novel species. Additionally, the concepts of ‘implicit disclosure’ and the contrasting views on ‘coverage vs disclosure’ frequently makes it challenging for applicants to defend their novel selection under the Indian scenario. Given the lack of enough precedents in India on this aspect, to date the fate of selection patents depends mostly on the judgement of the patent controllers. Not all hope is lost, however, since not only the Indian Patent Office, but also the IPAB and higher Courts have time-and-again acknowledged the existence of selection patents in India.
A food’s taste cannot be pinned down with enough precision and objectivity to make it copyrightable under EU law, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) said on 13 November. The decision creates a new standard that could be applied to all European copyright works, but would likely be the same under US law, intellectual property lawyers said.
NEW YORK – Major changes are coming to the makeup of the US Congress from the perspective of intellectual property policy, and while it may translate into more patent-friendly officials, the prospect for legislation is uneven, a panel of IP experts told a private sector conference here last week.
NEW YORK -- A panel of legal and government experts this week discussed trends in courts in the United States on patent cases and changes underway at the US Patent and Trademark Office. One conclusion? There may be a real shift in what is seen as patentable in the US, but it may take an act of Congress. [Note: part 1 of 2. The second part will address this week's changes in the US Congress.]
Nathan Kelley has stepped down from his role as solicitor and deputy general counsel at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to join the Perkins Coie law firm in Washington, DC. Kelley also had served as chief administrative patent judge in charge of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).