Original news and analysis on international IP policy
The USTR's disapproval of the ITC order excluding Apple products from the US raises difficult issues about the relationship between public decision-making and private solutions -- and invites strategic policymaking by other governments.
In an attempt to clarify the role of non-practising entities in patent infringement lawsuits, the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) yesterday released a new report highlighting major trends in patent litigation activities in the US.
The United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) today announced its remedy proposal to address Apple’s anticompetitive conduct to raise e-book prices. The proposal follows a July decision by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York finding that Apple conspired with five major publishers to fix the prices of e-books in the United States.
Infojustice writes: Over the past few years, patent-eligible subject matter has become one of the hotly debated areas of patent law in several countries. Even in the United States, the Supreme Court is beginning to express concerns about overly inclusive patent rules that stifle both competition and follow-on innovation. However, significant confusion persists over the difference between patent eligible subject matter and patentability requirements. Patent eligibility tests have proven quite difficult to apply, often leading to inconsistent and unpredictable results.
New York - Financial companies in 2012 faced nearly four times the patent litigation from non-practicing entities (NPEs), often called “patent trolls”, than they did five years ago and 2013 promises to be no different, according to a presentation by RPX Corporation, a patent risk management services provider. Financial institutions' use of social media and its associated risk was also a topic of discussion.
The final legislative piece needed for the establishment of a unitary EU patent system emerged from the European Commission today.
The United States is in a muddle over standard-essential patents. The nation’s courts and its executive agencies all agree that these patents play vital roles in the economy, but they disagree about what remedies are available when these patents are infringed. A recent decision by the US International Trade Commission has added to the confusion.
Andrew Updegrove discusses the handing down by Justice James Robart of a 207-page opinion in a closely-watched dispute between Motorola and Microsoft, involving several patents that Google later acquired (along with the rights under the lawsuit) when it purchased Motorola Mobility. In that opinion, Robart sought to determine what, under all relevant circumstances, Google could fairly and reasonably charge Microsoft to infringe upon the essential claims in question when (for example) it builds and sells an Xbox.
Just as the world of international intellectual property law and policy is ever-changing, so are the faces within it. Below you will find an updated list of the latest people news and IP moves across international organisations, national and regional governments, nonprofit organisations, and the private sector, from the first half of this year.
Church leaders, gun ownership advocates and other rights activists came together today to file a lawsuit against the US National Security Agency (NSA), declaring its surveillance programme unconstitutional. The broad coalition of plantiffs is represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
The authors write: "The US Patent and Trademark Office recently introduced a discounted “micro entity” rate on official fees for qualifying universities. Unfortunately, recent changes in the USPTO’s rules on applicants and powers of attorney hinders a qualifying university from benefiting from the micro entity discount. Here, we explain how the rules on micro entity status, applicants, and powers of attorney conflict with each other and offer suggestions for taking advantage of the micro entity discount without running afoul of the rule changes."
Setting general private copying levies on the first sale of blank media such as CDs and DVDs does not necessarily breach EU law, Europe's highest court said on 11 July. The law does not allow the levy to be collected where the intended use of the recording media clearly isn't for making private copies. But it doesn't bar a general levy system that includes the option of reimbursement where the intended use is not private copying, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) said.