Intellectual Property

RSS Link

The rapid rise of AI used with advertising, marketing and other consumer facing applications has caused the FTC to continue to take notice and issues guidance. For example, the FTC is concerned about false or unsubstantiated claims about an AI product’s efficacy. It has issued AI-related guidance in the past. The following is some recent FTC guidance to consider when referencing AI in your advertising. This guidance is not necessarily new, but the fact that it is being reiterated should be a signal that the FTC continues to focus on this area and that actions may be forthcoming. In fact,…
Continue Reading You Don’t Need a Machine to Predict What the FTC Might Do About Unsupported AI Claims

Does the business harm caused by COVID-19 qualify as “direct physical loss” for insurance purposes? In Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. American Home Assurance Company, Index No. 655755/2021, Commercial Division Justice Robert R. Reed held that the answer is no. In a decision announced on the record at an August 18, 2022 oral argument and entered on September 13, 2022 (see here), Justice Reed explained that his decision was dictated by the First Department’s April 7, 2022 decision in Consolidated Restaurant Operations, Inc. v. Westport Insurance Corp., 205 A.D.3d 76 (1st Dep’t 2022), and that he “follow[s] the First Department until the…
Continue Reading The Commercial Division Rejects Yet Another Insured’s Claim for Coverage for Covid-Related Revenues Losses

As patent litigators are well-aware, the Western District of Texas and the District of Delaware, the two most popular venues for patent litigation, each issued orders regulating litigation in their districts in 2022. So as of early 2023, what effect have those orders had on patent filings?
Continue Reading Early 2023 Update: Where Are Plaintiffs Filing Patent Cases Now?

On January 13, 2023, the New York State Commercial Division issued a decision in Bangladesh Bank v. Rizal Commercial Banking Corp., et al., Index No. 652051/2020, that continued New York courts’ tendency to assert personal jurisdiction over foreign banks, even if their only relationship with New York is having correspondent bank accounts. …
Continue Reading New York Courts Continue to Assert Personal Jurisdiction over Foreign Banks

The assumption that artists love credit is challenged when an artist appears to repudiate their authorship. Sometimes repudiation arises from personal animus while in other instances an artist might feel that their work is no longer “up to snuff.”[1] In some extreme circumstances, artists can be involuntarily thrust into a claim to repudiate their alleged authorship, which happened in the case of Fletcher v. Doig. [2]…
Continue Reading “Not My Work”: When Artists Dispute Authorship

Mask Work Infringement

In analogizing semiconductor chips to traditional areas of copyright law, the legislative history notes that, just as a plagiarist who copies only one chapter of a book may be held liable for infringement, a person may be liable for copying a part of a mask work if it is a qualitatively important portion that results in substantial similarity.
Continue Reading Protecting Semiconductor Chip Design under the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 (SCPA) – Part II (Infringement and Defense)

Understanding Mask Work

Mask work is a type of intellectual property protection designed to protect layout designs (topographies) of integrated circuits. It is authorized by the federal Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 (SCPA).
Continue Reading Protecting Semiconductor Chip Design under the Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 (SCPA) – Part I (Registration and Inspection)

The recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Caudill Seed & Warehouse Co. v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc., illustrates the flexible approach taken by courts when considering the calculation of compensatory damages in trade secrets cases. No. 21-5345, 2022 WL 16846585 (6th Cir. Nov. 10, 2022) There, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a jury’s compensatory damages verdict which awarded the plaintiff its research and development costs for its misappropriated trade secret even though the underlying trade secret was not destroyed through disclosure or other means. Id. at *15.
Continue Reading Reap What You Sow – Sixth Circuit Affirms Recovery of Research and Development Costs to Agricultural Company in Trade Secret Case

The tension between encouraging free and fair competition and protecting competitive advantages derived from hard work and ingenuity is at the very heart of trade secrets law. Among other things, this tension manifests itself in the gray areas endemic to any legal analysis of what information may constitute a “trade secret.” In comparison, assessing the behavior of those accused of misappropriating trade secrets can sometimes be a much more straightforward exercise. And it seems that the more egregious (and less “gray”) the behavior, the more likely a court is to exercise its limited discretion to restrain competition at the preliminary…
Continue Reading One Bad Apple Won’t Spoil the Rest of the Bunch’s Ability to Fairly Compete in Matthews International Corp. v. Lombardi

Should a defendant found liable for stealing trade secrets have to fork over all of the research and development costs it theoretically avoided by misappropriating the secrets? Yes, according to the “avoided costs” theory of unjust enrichment that is gaining traction and resulting in large verdicts in DTSA and UTSA cases around the country.[1] …
Continue Reading The Developing “Avoided Costs” Remedy in Trade Secret Litigation

The strength of the US dollar against the British pound – at present, the pound has dropped nearly 18% since the beginning of 2022 – would appear to make the purchase of art and other cultural property in the UK and Europe far less expensive for Americans. But the tumultuous state of the world has thrown a multitude of wrenches into British art exports to the US. The (not over yet) pandemic, (nor over yet) Brexit crisis, growing inflation, expanding regulations to prevent anti-money laundering, frustrating global supply chain backups and other issues have made it maddeningly difficult for US-based…
Continue Reading For US Art Collectors Shopping in the UK, the Dollar’s Strength is Deceiving

On September 22, 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) directed patent practitioners to current case law and sections of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) as reminders as the patent practitioners continue to work in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology space. A summary of these reminders (and links to more information) are provided herein.
Continue Reading Key Rules and Cases for Patent Practitioners Working on AI Patent Applications

On September 22, 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) conducted a live meeting for its Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Emerging Technologies (ET) Partnership Series. During this meeting, panelists from industry and the USPTO provided helpful tips on drafting and prosecuting patent applications that include AI components, including special tips for the biotech industry. Key takeaways from the meeting and published materials will be summarized in our Three-Part Blog Series.
Continue Reading Takeaways From the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies Partnership Series – Part Two of Three

The rising prevalence of crypto and virtual currencies has invited the scrutiny of several regulatory bodies who continue to grapple with the unique challenges posed by blockchain technology, FinCEN being one prime example. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) is an arm of the United States Department of Treasury that seeks to impede financial crimes such as money laundering and terrorist financing, and was the first financial regulator in the U.S. to address virtual currency.
Continue Reading Blockchain Game Developers and FinCEN: When are State Money Transmission Laws Applicable?

Subscribe

In the Know Weekly

Receieve weekly updates by email