“Hope,” charity, and copyright—Fair use or derivative work?By Margo Lynn HablutzelIntellectual Property, May 2009While unlikely to make new law in the area of copyright, derivative works, and fair use, the Fairey v. AP case could provide a new distinction between fair use and derivative works for political images.
Judicially imposed limitations on “business method” patentsBy Steven BehnkenIntellectual Property, May 2009The U.S. Patent Act defines four categories of patentable subject matter: processes, machines, articles of manufacture, and compositions of matter. Anything outside these four categories is by definition nonstatutory and is, therefore, not patentable.
The consequences of committing fraud in trademark filingsBy Richard B. Biagi & Jeremy M. RoeIntellectual Property, March 2009 For a multi-class application, fraud may potentially result in the cancellation of the mark within the international class of nonuse or misstated use. While a finding of fraud does not necessarily eliminate a mark owner’s common law rights, the owner does lose the benefits of a federal registration.
Obamas for sale: How much is too much?By Steven L. Baron & Lindsay H. LaVineIntellectual Property, March 2009Does the Obama family have legal recourse for the use of Malia and Sasha’s identities? The answer is most likely, yes. Most states, including Illinois, protect against the unauthorized use of an individual’s identity for commercial purposes. The so-called right of publicity extends to all people, regardless of whether they are public figures or private citizens.
PTO Consistency Initiative: 29 September 2008Intellectual Property, December 2008In an effort to further improve quality, the Office has created a centralized process by which an applicant may bring to the attention of the Office situations where, in applicant’s opinion, the Office has acted inconsistently in its treatment of applicant’s pending applications/recent registration(s).
Memorizing secret information may violate Trade Secrets ActBy Michael R. LiedLabor and Employment Law, September 2008Al Minor & Associates, Inc., (“AMA”) is an actuarial firm that designs and administers retirement plans and that employs pension analysts who work with approximately 500 clients.
The application of the Communications Decency Act’s IP exception to state law claimsBy Dale R. KurthIntellectual Property, July 2008The onslaught of User-Generated Content in Web publishing and New Media (also known as digital media, and generally defined as the integration of mediated or interactive communications with digital computers or the Internet) has created problems for the owners of IP rights.
Sports figures reclaim and protect their names (but Larry Bird really did sleep here!)By Margo Lynn HablutzelIntellectual Property, July 2008
In 1985, six years after Dick Butkus was elected to the Pro Football Hall of Fame, the Butkus Award was created by a group of sports fans in Florida to honor the best linebacker in college football each year. Twenty-two years later, Butkus sued.
Who owns the IP rights to high school sports?By Joseph A. SaltielIntellectual Property, July 2008When you missed your son scoring a touchdown in his state championship game this past November, the question is not whether you can relive the moment by purchasing photographs of it on the Internet, it is who is going to sell you those photographs.
“One day you’re in…..” – Louis Vuitton’s recent trademark casesBy Margo Lynn HablutzelIntellectual Property, May 2008On the Bravo Channel’s Project Runway reality show, host Heidi Klum warns designers “in fashion, one day you’re in, the next day, you’re out.” Louis Vuitton, a division of LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA, recently learned the same can be said in trademark courts, as it won a case and lost a case within a week of each other.
TrAid names aids trademark creationBy Daniel KeganIntellectual Property, May 2008Good trademark selection avoids litigation and builds brand equity.
Primer on copyright lawBy Peter LaSorsaFederal Civil Practice, March 2008Sophisticated digital equipment like handheld scanners, cellular telephones with built in cameras, and the easy accessibility of protected works via the Internet, are making the task of copying another’s work relatively easy, cheap and unsophisticated.
Intellectual property protection at a glanceBy Alan R. SingletonBusiness and Securities Law, February 2008Compare the different forms of intellectual property protection from this handy reference chart.
Business entity selection at a glanceBy Alan R. SingletonIntellectual Property, January 2008A table to assist with your business entity selection questions.
Drawing a line between art and copyrightBy Margo Lynn HablutzelIntellectual Property, January 2008Art can also be the center of intellectual property controversies, as recent charges of copyright infringement have shown.
Protecting trade secrets in cyberspaceBy Anne C. Keays & Mitchell S. ChabanIntellectual Property, January 2008This article will review the facts and findings in QSRSoft, Inc. v. Restaurant Technology Inc., a recent Northern District of Illinois opinion, and examine the court’s reasoning as guidance on measures to take in protection of trade secrets for Internet based systems.
Securing and collecting intellectual property collateralBy Daniel KeganCommercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy, December 2007Intellectual property has become a salient, yet confusing, asset in national and global business and financing.