Search results for

Lego has lost its first UDRP case in nearly 300 disputes because legoworkshop.com was used in a non-commercial manner, despite claims that it generated click-through revenue.

Free access: A method for rapid fish beheading, a gun for firing grasshoppers and a mechanism for extracting blood? It has to be Halloween

The US Supreme Court has begun hearing a case that tests whether Congress has the power to confer copyright on works that are in the public domain. The Court has to answer two questions: First, whether taking works from the public domain is within Congress's power as outlined in the "limited times" provision of the Copyright Clause. Second, even if it were, did Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act – which revived copyright protection for works previously in the public domain – violate the First Amendment? Chief Justice John Roberts said on the first day of hearings that there's something "at an intuitive level" appealing about the second argument. "One day I can perform Shostakovich; Congress does something, the next day I can't," he said. Even if the appeal is unsuccessful, the case might force the Supreme Court to set a standard in determining whether copyright laws are in compliance with the First Amendment.

IP owners with trade marks in Europe should review their portfolios before the IP Translator decision to avoid losing the scope of their rights. After a hearing last month, judges at the Court of Justice are considering questions referred to them in a dispute over the scope of protection provided by class headings in trade mark applications.

The volume of attacks on both government and industry computer systems is “disturbing”, according to Iain Lobban, the head of GCHQ, the UK’s leading intelligence agency.

Europe's highest court last month clarified the law on the patentability of processes involving research on human embryos and stem cells. The case was referred to EU the Court of Justice by the German Federal Patent Court, which had been asked to resolve a dispute between patent owner Oliver Brüstle and environmental campaigning group Greenpeace. Brüstle filed a patent application in 1997 relating to his research work on isolated and purified neural precursor cells produced from human embryonic stem cells used to treat neurological diseases. Greenpeace claimed the patent was invalid because it covers processes for obtaining precursor cells from human embryonic stem cells. The Court of Justice ruled that a process that involves removal of a stem cell from a human embryo at the blastocyst stage cannot be patented. The judges said that the use of human embryos for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes which are applied to the human embryo and are useful to it is patentable, but that their use for purposes of scientific research is not patentable. In reaching its conclusion, the Court defined embryos widely, saying that they begin right at the earliest stage of development of a human being. The German court must now decide whether the stem cells used in Brüstle's patent are classed as a human embryo.

”We establish fixed fees with our investigators, depending on the type of case”

At the beginning of October the Court of Justice of the EU decided that having territorial licences to football matches was against the philosophy of the single market. Initially, it looked like this would undermine businesses like the English Premier League, which charges very different prices for access to its games across Europe.

Lawyers says that a Dutch ruling in a dispute between Apple and Samsung does not signal the end of standard-essential patent litigation in the Netherlands

In October the US Copyright Office published its 24-month strategic review, which included a focus on improving registrations. Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante (pictured with her predecessor Marybeth Peters at AIPLA - Pallante on the left) discussed its aims with AIPLA members at a reception hosted by the Copyright Law Committee.