Intellectual Property

On December 4, 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a $2.18 billion damage award against defendant Intel Corporation because it found plaintiff VLSI Technology LLC had erred on its damages calculation, that one of the asserted patents was not infringed, and that Intel was wrongly barred from raising a defense that it had a newly acquired license to the asserted patents.

Read More

The Delaware District Court’s Ruling on cross-motions for summary judgment in the case of Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence Inc will provide guidance for similar AI training/copyright infringement cases and, as a bonus, it provides a bit of clarity (or muddies the waters… depending on your point of view) in the application of a post-Warhol fair use defense.

Read More

Many of us have said, “Bacon makes everything better.” Can you imagine the accolades someone would receive if they contributed to an invention that improves bacon? Well, it turns out that not all contributions count when it comes to being an inventor of a patent for a better method of precooking bacon.

Read More

The Ninth Circuit was recently asked to address the “public interest” exemption to California’s anti-SLAPP law in a class action lawsuit brought by a Plaintiff whose photo and personal information were used without her consent to advertise subscriptions to a website. The case, Martinez v. ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. (decided Sep. 21, 2023), posed interesting substantive and procedural issues concerning the interplay between one’s intellectual property rights and California’s anti-SLAPP law.

Read More

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has again relied on the Supreme Court’s Alice case to invalidate patents on the grounds that they are directed to an abstract idea. Realtime Data LLC v. Fortinet Inc. ( Fed. Cir. 8/2/2023) 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19857.

Realtime owned several patents covering systems and methods for digital data compression. In 2017 and 2018, Realtime sued a number of entities in the District of Delaware for infringement of five of its patents. The defendants moved to dismiss Realtime’s complaints on the grounds that the claims in the patents were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. section 101. In 2019, the district court granted the defendant’s motion and held that all of the claims in the five patents were invalid.

Read More

In JBrick, LLC v. Chazak Kinder, Inc. et al, 1-21-cv-02883 (EDNY Sep. 21, 2023) (Hector Gonzalez), the District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment regarding the validity of its copyright. 

Read More

Last year, Jason M. Allen won first place at the Colorado State Fair (the “Competition”) for the two-dimensional artwork entitled Théâtre D’opéra Spatial (the “Work”), which he produced with the aid of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”). Despite receiving this accolade and Allen’s arguments that he contributed significant creative elements to the AI-generated Work, his attempts to copyright the work have been unsuccessful.

Read More

On July 24, 2023, the United States Patent and Trademark Office changed its procedures for the PTO Director’s review of certain decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.  The decisions in question are those decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to deny or grant petitions to institute proceedings under the America Invents Act.  Those proceedings include inter partes review and post grant review.  This change follows two years of an interim process and public comment period.

Read More

The Ninth Circuit recently revisited the issue of “embedding” content by a website and its implication for copyright infringement claims. On July 17, 2023, the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Hunley v. Instagram, LLC, and affirmed the trial court’s ruling that Instagram, a social media platform, could not face liability for secondary infringement under the “Server Test” because plaintiffs could not prove infringement of their copyrighted photographs since the third-party news platforms had “embedded,” but did not store, the copyrighted photos on their own websites. The Court ultimately reasoned that because the plaintiff posted their photos on Instagram and essentially stored a copy of those images on Instagram’s servers, Instagram did not violate or infringe on the plaintiff’s rights since Instagram had a sublicense to display photos posted onto their platform and the third-party news sites had “embedded” the content in their articles.

Read More

It has been referred to as one of the top copyright cases to watch this year. This case, Alexis Hunley, et al v. Instagram, LLC, questioned the scope and validity of the Server Test, a copyright doctrine that was established by the 9th Circuit and has since been rejected by a number of courts.

Read More