Articles Posted in Intellectual Property

Published on: | by

The internet has become the home to many advances in the world. With one click of a button, a person can communicate with another person located on the other side of the world. With another click of a button, a person can buy a shirt and have it delivered right to his/her doorstep in a matter of days. Not only has the internet made things more convenient, it has become a tool in starting a business. Besides finding a tutorial to create a website, inventors can now fund their projects to bring their ideas to reality through crowdfunding. The inventor simply places his idea on a crowdfunding website, e.g., Kickstarter or Indiegogo, and sends the link to a large group. Depending on the invention’s popularity, the entrepreneur can raise a high amount of money with little effort.

Crowdfunding is starting to become a viable source of funding for startups. According to Forbes, crowdfunding is predicted to overcome venture capitalists next year.  Although, crowdfunding has made it easier to create a business, it does not come without legal problems. One of the biggest issues is intellectual property. From patent trolls, to patent infringement, crowdfunding websites have found themselves under attack by businesses.

In late 2012, 3D Systems brought a patent infringement lawsuit against Formlabs.  3D Systems alleged both direct and indirect patent infringement for its three-dimensional printing technology. This lawsuit came after Formlabs collected over $2 million from its crowdfunding campaign to put its three-dimensional printer into production. Formlabs was planning on selling the printer for less than 3D Systems’ printer, leading to the filing of the complaint. No answer was ever filed in the original suit, but a series of time extensions indicated that the companies were looking for a settlement. In late 2013, a notice of voluntary dismissal was filed and a settlement looked imminent.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

ZeniMax Media, Inc. (“ZeniMax”) is a company that develops and publishes video games. These games include Fallout and Elder Scrolls. ZeniMax publishes the video games through its subsidiaries and has found widespread success in the gaming market. With that widespread success, ZeniMax was able to allocate funds for the development of virtual reality gaming.

In April 2012, a ZeniMax employee started communicating with Palmer Luckey. At the time, Luckey was a college student working on a virtual reality headset prototype named Rift. The ZeniMax employee took interest in Luckey’s creation and offered some help in its development. Luckey then sent the ZeniMax employee a copy of his prototype where the employee and other ZeniMax personnel added their own improvements. After their improvements, ZeniMax entered into a Non-Disclosure Agreement with Luckey to share the enhancements made on the prototype, including its use in a game ZeniMax developed.

After the prototype became a working model, ZeniMax performed demonstrations at the Electronic Entertainment Exposition. The demonstrations were only done by appointment. After adding his own modifications and merely days after the exposition, Luckey started to commercialize the headset under a newly-formed company called Oculus VR.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Trade secrets are important assets for a business and derive their value due to their secrecy.  Trade secrets constitute confidential business information that give a competitive edge to their owner.  They include industrial, manufacturing, or commercial secrets.  Any unauthorized usage of a trade secret is a violation.  With secrecy, a business can develop an advantage over its competition. By placing the value in its secrecy, the information is subject to outside forces attempting to steal the valuable information. By placing the information on a network server accessible through the Internet, a business organization’s vulnerability increases. Rather than simply risking disclosure by a disgruntled employee or being a victim of corporate espionage, businesses can now find themselves at risk of unauthorized access, i.e., hacking. The Internet allows information to be quickly and easily disseminated all around the world. Information can be accessed by anyone who has access to a computer and the Internet. With the borderless nature of the web, it would be difficult to subject users to the laws and regulations protecting trade secrets. As a result, the United Nations created the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) in order to address issues regarding intellectual property, which includes, but is not limited to, trade secrets.

The purpose of WIPO is to create a worldwide intellectual property system that fosters creativity and innovation. Currently, there are 188 members, including, the United States and United Kingdom. WIPO’s services include dispute resolution to intellectual property-related cases such as arbitration and mediation. It provides an annual forum for governments, intergovernmental organizations, and industry groups to meet and discuss issues.

International standards for trade secret protection are similar to the formula adopted by over 100 members of the World Trade Organization. The standard is published as a part of the TRIPS Agreement.  For example, Article 39 states that members must protect undisclosed information (e.g., trade secrets) from unauthorized use that is contrary to honest commercial practices. Also, the information must be secret in nature and there must be reasonable steps to protect the secrecy. Also, Articles 42-49 call for civil proceedings to enforce the standards.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Trade secrets are vital to a business’s growth and development.  From a practical standpoint, the advantage a business may have vanishes once the trade secret is publicly known. As a result, businesses have employed various methods to prevent the leaking of trade secrets. From confidentiality agreements to encryption, a smart business should attempt to prevent the risks. However, these efforts may not be enough, calling for the need of regulation. In general, the applicable regulations primarily clarify the definitions, parameters, and remedies for trade secret theft.

Uniform Trade Secrets Act

The Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) has been adopted in forty-seven states and the District of Columbia. It defines a trade secret as information that derives economic value from its secrecy and is subject to reasonable effort to maintain its secrecy.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

What are trade secrets?

In general, the definition of a trade secret varies from state to state. Essentially, it means any confidential information you would not want your competitors to know about. This could be anything from customer lists, marketing plans, to business models. Although, this definition is broad, it is important to look at the exact definition of what is a trade secret according to the applicable jurisdiction. In California, a trade secret is defined as information that takes independent economic value from its confidential nature subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. Here, California’s definition of a trade secret places a focus on economic impact. This differs from states such as New York where the law simply defines a trade secret as information that would give an advantage over a competitor. See Ashland Mgt. v. Janien, 82 N.Y.2d 395, 407 (1993). In comparison, New York has a broader definition than California and covers any non-economic related trade secrets.

Why is protection necessary?

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In general, intellectual property, includes, copyright, trademarks, and patents (collectively “IP”).  According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, IP refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, and symbols, names and images used in commerce. Now, when it comes to the use of intellectual property, what is considered fair use?

What is fair use and how does it affect intellectual property right?

There are multiple ways to protect or claim your intellectual property. When an individual believes that its intellectual property has been misappropriated (i.e., taken without consent), it has the right to demand that it be removed or notify the hosting organization about the infringement, so that they can remove it. The services of a lawyer should be obtained if any of these steps fail. However, before any of these steps are taken, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), which is codified under 17 U.S.C. section 512, recommends that the individual making the claim considers whether the use of their intellectual property is fair use. Fair use is defined under 17 U.S.C. § 107, where it states that copyrighted material may be used so long as it is for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, . . . scholarship, or research” and it will not be considered an infringement of the copyright. The following factors are evaluated to determine fair use: (1) purpose and character of use; (2) nature or type of work used; (3) amount of the work used; and (4) effect using the copyrighted work will have on its use for the author or creator. When deciding whether to demand removal, redaction, or whether to pursue a legal case alleging misappropriation, individuals should be aware of their legal rights and relevant factors.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In 2011, Congress proposed two relatively similar bills—House of Representatives’ Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Senate’s Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA)—that legislators and lobbyists hailed as providing important protections against piracy and counterfeiting online. Yet, this apparently strong support was quickly withdrawn when a massive online protest in January 2012 sparked intense and ultimately fatal opposition to the bills.

Despite the strong public disapproval and lack of Congressional support, in July 2014 the Intellectual Property Law (IPL) Section of the ABA issued a white paper proposing that Congress enact legislation allowing essentially the same private copyright infringement suits against allegedly infringing foreign websites as those provided for in SOPA and PIPA, and suggesting that those protections be extended to trademarks as well.

How Does the ABA’s Proposal Differ From Previously Rejected Legislation?

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Since the goal of brand management is to optimize the market’s perception of a brand, it follows that effective brand management requires establishing and maintaining a relationship with the target market. Recently, much of relationship development has been accomplished through social media. Although, brand awareness can expand with social media, but companies should be skeptical towards third-party statements regarding their brand.  In fact, legal recourse is available against third parties who engage in trade libel, defamation, and trademark or copyright infringements.

How Can Trademark Misuse Occur on Social Media?

Considering the risk that a negative criticism of a brand on social media will quickly harm the brand’s reputation, it is important for a company to be aware of the types of trademark misuse or infringement. The line between constitutionally-protected free speech and violations can be blurry. For instance, a social media username may be confused with an official brand account, either coincidentally or by imposters (i.e., posing as an employee or someone sponsored by the brand). Further, user statements may improperly dilute a trademark under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act through blurring (i.e., associating a mark with other goods/services) or tarnishment (i.e., associating a mark with substandard goods/services).

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Crowdfunding involves a large number of people contributing small amounts of money to finance a business venture, typically an early-stage startup company. Over the past several years, online crowdfunding platforms have become a popular tool for new businesses and entrepreneurs to market inventions, generate revenue, and increase customer base. While improving accessibility to funding offers a significant economic advantage, crowdfunders should be careful not to release too much information before legally protecting an original idea.

What Are the Legal Risks in Crowdfunding?

The major legal risks in crowdfunding stem from crowdfunders launching campaigns before adequately identifying and protecting intellectual property (IP). This inadequate IP protection may allow ideas and inventions to be copied or stolen without legal repercussions. The risk of unprotected IP is magnified by various public disclosure requirements mandated by online crowdfunding platforms. Specifically, popular crowdfunding websites like Kickstarter require detailed disclosures of how a particular invention or product works—beyond a simple prototype—before a campaign is posted. Moreover, sophisticated predators are constantly searching crowdfunding websites for unprotected ideas.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The writing is on the wall.  The future of television and media consumption is moving away from network channels and physical sales to an “On-Demand Internet” streaming model.  This trend has already begun with millennials.  Millennials, as a group, do not subscribe to cable television or purchase music. Instead, services like Netflix, Hulu, and SoundCloud provide Millennials with On-Demand access to television shows, movies, and music. Television networks and traditional media companies must adjust to this new trend. This issue recently came to a head in the Supreme Court’s decision in ABC v. Aereo. The Court’s decision, while resolving the immediate issue in the case, has caused a problem in the larger scheme of things. The decision has put a new spin on how the Court applies the Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act of 1976. If you provide digital media content through Internet streaming or access content through the cloud, then the Aereo decision could affect you.

What Was the Issue In ABC v. Aereo?

Aereo is a company that provides a small device that a user can connect to a computer for a monthly fee. The device allows the user to pick up network television broadcast signals and stream them directly to the user’s computer.  ABC and other network broadcasters sued Aereo for copyright infringement. The issue in the case was whether Aereo’s device fits under the definitions of performance and public transmission within the Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act of 1976.  The Transmit Clause describes the exclusive right to “transmit or otherwise communicate a performance . . . of the [copyrighted] work . . . to the public by means of a device or process . . .”  The Court held that Aereo did transmit ABC’s performance and that the transmission was to the public.  Therefore, Aereo infringed upon ABC’s copyrights.

Continue Reading ›