Member Groups

Intellectual Property
The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Intellectual Property Law

Browse articles by year: 2019 (6) 2018 (15) 2017 (20) 2016 (11) 2015 (22) 2014 (28) 2013 (17) 2012 (19) 2011 (21) 2010 (16) 2009 (17) 2008 (16) 2007 (13) 2006 (6) 2005 (11) 2004 (6) 2003 (6) 2002 (19) 2001 (9) 2000 (17) 1999 (20)

Newsletter Articles From 2010

7th Circuit’s trade dress regrets By Shannon A.R. Bond October 2010 Attorneys should keep the Jay Franco & Sons, Inc. v. Clemens Franek case in mind when approached by a client about protecting product design trade dress.
The © Hawk: Illinois anti-piracy law is sunk by copyright preemption By Dale R. Kurth June 2010 Even today, sound recordings fixed prior to 1971 do not qualify for federal copyright protection.
Copyright notices By Daniel Kegan December 2010 Copyright Office Notices.
Discovering Electronically Stored Information (ESI): Self-Reliance and FRCivP 26* By Daniel Kegan December 2010 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (b)(2)(B) now requires an early conference among attorneys to discuss and plan discovery, including Electronically Stored Information (ESI). Attorneys cannot simply delegate to clients or commercial services the responsibility of understanding ESI and ESI discovery planning. The attorney has a non- delegable responsibility to know, not only traditional discovery relevance but also enough about email, computers, file archiving, the client’s business, and human nature to competently supervise others. This article presents an efficient procedure for self-reliant attorneys and firms to successfully manage the ESI discovery process. Guidelines are presented for both Macintosh and Windows computers.
Don’t let pharmaceutical product trademarks be a pain By Shannon A.R. Bond March 2010 The process involved in filing a trademark registration for a pharmaceutical product.
Google Books: The future is now? By Dale R. Kurth June 2010 The case of The Author’s Guild, et al. v. Google, Inc. will go a very long way in deciding how society as a whole makes its tentative way down the path of an increasingly technological terrain.
The grammar of intellectual property: Copyright is a noun, trademark is an adjective By Daniel Kegan March 2010 Clarifying the definitions of patent, trademark, and copyright, and how to use each term properly.
Happy 300th birthday, Statute of Anne and Copyright March 2010 A brief history of the first copyright law, which became effective in 1710.
Intellectual Improbabilities™ By Daniel Kegan December 2010 Sad Sap $1.65b verdict favoring Oracle for admitted copyright liability. Judge should refer even clearly meritless mandamus writ when his spouse is on defendant's board (In re Specht, trademark suit). Baha'i organizational divorce 40 years later, where's the contempt. Judge Posner clarifies "exceptional Lanham Act cases."
Intellectual Improbabilities™ By Daniel Kegan June 2010 Recent developments in intellectual property law.
NDIL adopts Local Patent Rules March 2010 The Local Patent Rules apply to all cases filed in or transferred to the district after October 1, 2009 involving a claim of utility patent infringement, non-infringement, invalidity, or unenforceability.
No just desserts for jus tertii defense in Illinois By Steven L. Baron and Rebecca A. Edwards March 2010 A review of the landmark case of The Jim Mullen Charitable Foundation v. World Ability Federation, in which a jus tertii defense used in a trademark infringement case is rejected for the first time in Illinois.
Pennywise and pound foolish: Compilation copyrights and the limits of administrative deference By Daniel Kegan October 2010 Copyright claimants should consider registering their commercially important works individually, rather than relying on derivative copyrights, such as compilations, collective works.
Supreme Court ruling leaves window open for business method patents By Brian R. Michalek October 2010 This past June, the Supreme Court issued the much-anticipated opinion in Bilski et al. v. Kappos. The 5-4 majority opinion held the claims of the patent application at issue were directed to an abstract idea and therefore were not patentable under 35 U.S.C. Section 101.
Toy Story: The battle of Barbie versus the Bratz By Dale R. Kurth December 2010 A look at the recently decided case of Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc.
The value of strategic counsel By Barbara B. Bressler October 2010 Laypeople do not understand the nuances of trademark law, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Web site does not do those people a service by making it appear easy to do it themselves.