People's Daily Online -- China faces international pressure on IPR earlier than expected:


China has faced international pressure on its handling of intellectual property rights (IPR) five to ten years earlier than predicted, a senior Chinese IPR governor has said.

"More and more Chinese companies have come under pressure from IPR issues with the rapid economic development in the country," Tian Lipu, director of the State Intellectual Property Office, said at a recent meeting on IPR protection.

Among the 111 complaints the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has lodged under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 42 have been against Chinese enterprises, according to Tian.

Under Section 337, imported products that allegedly violate U.S. IPR can be barred from entry into the United States. Complaints under Section 337 are made to the USITC and generally involve allegations of infringement of patents, trademarks or copyrights.

Patent payment and the amount of compensation foreign companies have claimed is increasing, Tian said. Chinese companies have paid 3 billion yuan (about 375 million U.S. dollars) for DVD production.

A growing number of industries are involved in IPR disputes, from lighter and pen manufacturing to bio-pharmacy and computer chip production, he said. Patent suits lodged by foreign companies are threatening the economic security of certain Chinese industries, he added.

"Domestic companies must strengthen their IPR awareness, improve their innovative capacities and be active in patent applications at home and abroad," he warned. "When facing lawsuits, they should heed domestic and international laws on IPR."

Source: Xinhua

Posted by mikki at 01:53 PM | Permalink

Is Hormel Losing its Grip on Spam?:


(Magilla Marketing) Though the case has no official legal clout in the U.S., some American executives battling Hormel Foods over use of the word spam see positive signs in a tiny UK technology company’s victory over the food giant last week.
NetBop Technologies last week claimed to be the first to get the green light on an EU trademark for a product name containing the word “spam.”
According to NetBop, Hormel Foods, owner of the trademark SPAM for more than six decades, challenged the company in March 2005 for its attempt to trademark BopSpam, a product designed to filter bulk unsolicited e-mail.
Hormel dropped its opposition to the trademark when it became clear in a preliminary hearing that EU patent officials were leaning in NetBop’s favor, a statement from NetBop said.

It is believed to be Hormel’s first defeat on either side of the Atlantic in its rigorous defense of its trademark on SPAM, according to an attorney involved in a battle with the company.
A search on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Web site shows Hormel to be involved in more than 80 disputes over usage of the word “spam” in company and product names.

Posted by mikki at 01:49 PM | Permalink

Media Law Prof Blog: Ninth Circuit Rules In Flashdance Case:


The Ninth Circuit has ruled in Marder v. Lopez that a dancer who signed a General Release allowing Paramount to use her life story as the basis for the film Flashdance and received $2300 in return does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted in her attempt to share in "the revenues Paramount allegedly received from Sony for the licensing and exploitation of Flashdance in the Video [Jennifer Lopez created]" or as co-author of the screenplay for the film, or in claims under the "Lanham Act, the Copyright Act, and the state law right of publicity and unfair competition." The court examined the General Release and held that its language "is exceptionally broad and we hold that it is fatal to each of Marder's claims against Paramount. Such a release of "each and every claim" covers all claims within the scope of the language, absent extrinsic evidence to the contrary." While the court noted that "in hindsight the agreement appears to be unfair to Marder...there is simply no evidence that her consent was obtained by fraud, deception, misrepresentation, duress, or undue influence. Indeed, when she signed the Release, Marder was represented by counsel. She has not asserted that her counsel in 1983 was incompetent or deficient in any way." Neither could she assert copyright infringement claims against Sony or against singer Jennifer Lopez for a music video Lopez created that used scenes from the film.

Posted by mikki at 12:27 PM | Permalink

Yahoo! sued by dating site over Google keywords | OUT-LAW.COM:


Yahoo! is being sued for allegedly paying to trigger adverts when a dating site's name is typed into Google. The owner of Lovecity.com accuses Yahoo!, which also runs a dating service, and three other companies, of infringing its trade marks.

Advertising words in Google have stirred up recent controversy as companies use similar techniques to gain an edge on competitors. Courts have given mixed rulings so far in cases involving such brands as Geico, Zocor and Edina Realty.

In the Yahoo! case, JP Enterprises says that Yahoo!, HDVE LLC, Spark Networks and Insight Direct USA are guilty of trade mark dilution and infringement. It claims that anyone typing "www.lovecity.com", "lovecity" or "lovecity.com" into the search engine is presented with adverts on the side of the page detailing the services of the named competing companies.

Posted by mikki at 12:25 PM | Permalink

Microsoft Loses Another Round in Excel Patent Case:


Things aren't going well for Microsoft on the litigation front. On Friday, a United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a patent infringement verdict against Microsoft from last year, and as Microsoft protests, the bill piles up.

The patent, owned by inventor and businessman Armando Amado, covers linking a spreadsheet to a database. He first developed the method in 1990, then offered to license it to Microsoft (Quote, Chart) in 1992 for use in Excel. Microsoft declined the offer.

Amado received a patent in 1994 and one year later, Microsoft introduced a new version of Office that featured linking of Excel spreadsheets to the Access database that came with Office. Microsoft issued a patch for its products while the case is appealed.

Posted by mikki at 12:24 PM | Permalink

ag-ip-news.com (Intellectual Property News Agency)AGIPNEWS3189:


BRUSSELS - The European Commission announced on Tuesday that it will hold a public hearing on future EU patent policy on July 12, 2006.

This is the second step of the public consultation launched in January 2006 with the aim of collecting stakeholders' views on the patent system in Europe and seeking views on what measures could be taken in the near future to improve this system.

On January 16, 2006, the Commission launched a public consultation on the future patent policy in Europe. The consultation focuses on the structure of the patent system in Europe rather than issues of substantive patent law.

The consultation questionnaire covered four major topics: basic principles of the patent system, the proposed Community patent; non-community initiatives such as the London Protocol and the European Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) and possible areas for harmonization at Community level.

Posted by mikki at 12:23 PM | Permalink

TheStar.com - Rivals gear up as patent lapses on cholesterol drug:


The makers of four cholesterol drugs are busy promoting their products as new competition opens for such drugs.
On Friday, Merck & Co.'s Zocor will lose U.S. patent protection, and health plans are aggressively trying to promote low-cost generic versions of the drug for patients who don't require a major cut in their cholesterol levels. The makers of Lipitor, Crestor and Vytorin will be battling more fiercely.
Experts said Pfizer Inc.'s Lipitor will suffer most in the new environment because many patients on low doses of its medicine could reach the necessary cholesterol level at a high dose of Zocor.

Posted by mikki at 12:22 PM | Permalink

Patent Baristas: USPTO Biotech Backlog: Bad, Getting Worse, No End in Sight:


The San Francisco Business Times ran an article reiterating what patent practitioners already know. That is, the increasing backlog at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office is bad, it's getting worse and the new set of proposals meant to reduce the waiting time will not provide relief.

The backlogs are an increasingly serious issue for biotechs. It can take patent examiners up to 15 months to begin reviewing an organic chemistry patent application. It can take more than three years to get a drug application to a patent examiner. Once a review has begun, the USPTO can take several more years to grant a patent.

As we've discussed, the new rules under consideration would allow just one follow-on to a pending application. A subsequent application would have to include an explanation as why it was not submitted previously. A second, related proposal would limit an application to 10 claims, which are statements describing the heart of the invention. The USPTO is currently reviewing comment on the proposed rules and will issue final regulations in the fall or winter.

Admittedly, almost one-third of new applications in 2004 were for follow-on applications but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Part of the reason for continuations is to allow an applicant the opportunity to carve our the proper claim scope. That is, coverage that would not be too overbroad or too narrow but just right.

Many industries besides biotech rely on obtaining adequate patent protection in a timely fashion. However, biotech companies are particularly affected by both the backlog and the proposed rule changes. And, perhaps no other industry is as dependent upon patents as is the biotechnology industry. A biotechnology company can spend hundreds of millions of dollars over more than a decade before seeing any revenue. The long development time and intensive capital needs make the early stages of development critical in terms of patent protection in order to entice investors to get involved in what is already an incredibly risky venture. Thus, a flexible patenting system that allows companies to protect the full scope of their inventions through the filing of continuations is critical.

Posted by mikki at 12:20 PM | Permalink

Moneycontrol Tech Blog > Ebay Sued By Net2phone:


Looks like a good thing can never last. Everyone’s favorite VoIP company Skype which is owned by Ebay has just been sued by Net2Phone alleging that Skype has infringed its patent for the placing of calls over the net.

The law suit, filed in the US District court of Newark, alleges that Skype infringed a patent filed by Net2Phone under US Patent Class 704, which broadly covers data processing encompassing speech signal processing, linguistics, language translation, and audio compression/decompression. Like any other law suits filed recently the Net2Phone suit is going for broke, seeking damages and an injunction against further infringement, which would basically mean shutting the Skype service down.

I guess this is direct fallout of Skype’s decision to offer free incoming calls in the States.

Posted by mikki at 12:17 PM | Permalink

FT.com / US / Supreme Court - US antitrust watchdogs in clash over generics:


An unusual rift between the top antitrust authorities in the US over the legality of deals between pharmaceutical companies and their generic counterparts is intensifying, raising questions for the companies involved in the controversial transactions.

The dispute between the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, which is playing out in the arena of the Supreme Court, is likely to become even messier next week when the FTC takes the rare step of filing a second petition urging the court to take on the issue over the objections of the Bush administration.

At the centre of the disagreement between the justice department, the top law enforcement body, and the FTC, an independent agency composed of Democratic and Republican commissioners, is a complex patent dispute involving Schering-Plough and its drug, K-Dur 20, which treats the side-effects of drugs for high blood pressure.

In 1997 Schering ended a dispute with a generic rival by paying the company, Upsher-Smith, $60m (€46m, £32m) to stay out of the market until 2001. Schering’s patent was originally intended to expire this year. The FTC has claimed that the agreement, as well as similar deals that have since been agreed between drug companies, are anti-competitive.

Posted by mikki at 12:16 PM | Permalink

Pfizer gets favorable ruling in Viagra patent case in China:


Jun. 5, 2006 (China Knowledge) - A Beijing court has upheld drug giant Pfizer's patent for Viagra, ruling against China’s patent review board, reported Associated Press.

According to the report, an official at the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court on Monday confirmed the decision but said she could not provide other information.

New York-based Pfizer Inc. appealed in 2004 against a decision by the patent review board supporting the claims of at least a dozen Chinese drug companies for the right to make sildenafil citrate, the main active ingredient in the anti-erectile dysfunction drug Viagra.

Many local drug companies have been aggressively challenging patents in hopes of being allowed to market generic copies without having to pay royalties.

The court ruling also signified China’s efforts to protect intellectual property and protect patents, as part of its agreement when it entered the World Trade Organization in 2001.
                    
  

Posted by mikki at 12:16 PM | Permalink

Morgan Stanley takes domain name from cat | The Register:


A cat has lost its bid to retain a controversial domain name after a multinational investment bank took it to the National Arbitration Forum.

Baroness Penelope Cat of Nash DCB, who is listed as the owner of mymorganstanleyplatinum.com and was given some assistance in the case by Michael Woods, lost control of the domain to Morgan Stanley.

A key part of the case rested on whether or not Baroness Penelope was truly the owner of the domain. The first indication that the decision was unlikely to veer cat-wards came in the written decision of Arbitration Forum Panellist Richard Hill.

"Respondent maintains that it is a cat, that is, a well-known carnivorous quadruped which has long been domesticated," summarised Hill. "However, it is equally well-known that the common cat, whose scientific name is Felis domesticus, cannot speak or read or write."

Baroness Penelope argued in its submission that "the registration information is not false; there are an immense number of Domain Names registered by non human beings".

Hill was not to be swayed, however. "A common cat could not have submitted the Response (or even have registered the disputed domain name)," he wrote. "Therefore, either Respondent is a different species of cat, such as the one that stars in the motion picture 'Cat From Outer Space,' or Respondent's assertion regarding its being a cat is incorrect."

"If Respondent is in fact a cat from outer space, then it should have so indicated in its reply, in order to avoid unnecessary perplexity by the Panel."

In order to retain the domain name, Baroness Penelope had to fulfill three criteria. Having failed the first two, the case rested on whether or not having a cat as a registered owner of a domain constituted "bad faith". Hill ruled that it did.

Baroness Penelope was uncontactable for comment at the time of going to press.

See: the ruling

Posted by mikki at 12:14 PM | Permalink

Computer Reseller News - For Providers of Information Technology Solutions:


Multi-threat security solutions provider Fortinet has announced that it has completed an acquisition of all pending patents and related intellectual property (IP) assets of CoSine Communications, Inc.

In connection with the sale, CoSine retained a limited right to continue using the transferred IP to support its existing customers.

CoSine was a leading provider of a widely-adopted Internet Protocol (IP) Service Delivery Platform that enabled telecommunication carriers and network service providers to rapidly deliver a an array of secure services simultaneously to thousands of subscribers from within a service provider's network, including managed firewall, VPN and security broadband access. Products offered by CoSine included the IPSX switch, InVision service management system and InGage customer network management software.

Posted by mikki at 09:53 PM | Permalink

CODi Sues Brenthaven for Cybersquatting and Trademark Infringement:


HARRISBURG, Pa. --(Business Wire)-- June 1, 2006 -- CODi, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against Fairhaven Group, Inc. d/b/a Brenthaven and Scott Armstrong (a Brenthaven executive and part-owner). The complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania, alleges that Brenthaven and Armstrong registered a domain name, codibag.com, which is confusingly similar to CODi's federally registered trademark, CODi(R). The complaint further alleges that Brenthaven then used the codibag.com domain name to divert customers to a website that offered solely Brenthaven products. CODi's complaint seeks to permanently enjoin Brenthaven and Armstrong's acts of cybersquatting, trademark infringement and dilution. Additionally, the lawsuit seeks up to $100,000 in statutory damages, as well as treble damages and attorneys' fees.

Posted by mikki at 09:52 PM | Permalink

Press Releases - Directions Magazine:


FREMONT, Calif. – June 1, 2006 – @Road, Inc. (NASDAQ: ARDI), a global provider of next-generation solutions for Mobile Resource Management (MRM), today announced that the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) has recently issued the Company two new patents covering innovative MRM technology and services.

The first patent depicts a system and method for “Dynamic server managed profiles for mobile users” while the second U.S. patent granted to @Road covers a system and method for “Playing of audio via voice calls initiated from visual navigation.” @Road can now claim ownership to 22 issued U.S. patents and additional patents and patents pending in jurisdictions around the world.

“We believe these patents represent important additions to our growing intellectual property portfolio,” said Leo Jolicoeur, @Road chief marketing officer. “They also help us reinforce our leadership position in the Mobile Resource Management market and illustrate our ability to develop differentiated MRM solutions that add value to the Company and to our customers.”

@Road’s first newly issued U.S. Patent, No. 7,043,255, covers systems and methods for a data processor to communicate profiles over a network to a mobile communication device, such as a cellular phone or personal digital assistant adapted to receive location information. The profiles contain parameters which control certain operations of the mobile communication device.

Posted by mikki at 09:50 PM | Permalink