The messy intersection of copyright, trade secret, and false advertising:

PrecisionFlow Technologies, Inc. v. CVD Equipment Corp., 2007 WL 844893 (N.D.N.Y.)

Plaintiff PFT, which makes custom gas and chemical delivery systems and provides computer chip fabrication services, sued CVD for false advertising and commercial disparagement under the Lanham Act and related state law claims. In essence, PFT claimed that CVD falsely told others in the industry that PFT’s goods and services infringed CVD’s IP rights, causing PFD damage. For example, when PFT bid on a job for Lucent, with which it had an ongoing business relationship, CVD told Lucent that PFT’s performance would infringe CVD’s rights. CVD got the contract instead.

CVD countersued PFT and PFT’s president, the former employee of a company CVD bought, alleging that he stole the company’s IP, including copyrighted technical drawings, software, and operations manuals. CVD has applied for registrations and registered copyrights covering some of the IP it purchased, including technical drawings for the “Silane Delivery System.” CVD claimed that PFT copied substantial portions of the Silane Delivery System and other works, and that PFT misappropriated confidential information, wrongfully disclosed that information to customers, and interfered with CVD’s business relations with Lucent by falsely informing Lucent that PFT was entitled to sell competing goods. Thus, CVD’s counterclaims alleged copyright infringement, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and tortious interference with prospective business relations.

PFT’s defense to the copyright claims was that the relevant information wasn’t created by the predecessor company and that whatever protectable rights it may have had were abandoned, transferred, or licensed to third parties. This also affects the analysis of whether the information embodied in the works was a trade secret.

The works at issue were identified as: Lucent Silane Delivery System Drawings; four Emcore standard gas panel drawings; Lucent and IBM wiring diagrams and drawings; Silane Delivery System Software; IBM Silane Systems Software; Lucent Gas Cabinet Software; IBM Gas Cabinet Software; and IBM Touch Screen Software. As the names indicate, PFT argued that many of the drawings were provided by customers free of charge, given that customers in this industry typically provide detailed specifications for the equipment they want built, including schematic and/or conceptual drawings and even specifying component manufacturers. PFT’s president said in a declaration that his former employer did little or no independent engineering.

CVD submitted a declaration from its employee, the former president of the predecessor company, who stated that the company would sometimes develop schematic drawings, and that in any event it would prepare detailed proprietary manufacturing, assembly and layout drawings, because the schematic drawings were insufficient for manufacturing purposes. If the customer ordered standard equipment, the company would use and if necessary modify standard detailed drawings it previously created. He added that the company did perform extensive design work, much of which was billed to customers. (Even so, are these copyrightable derivative works? Or do they flow so naturally from the schematic drawings that no independent copyright can subsist, either because of the originality requirement for derivative works or because of merger and related doctrines? Because of the undeveloped posture of the case, and because of the court’s focus on trade secret issues, these questions are unaddressed.)

PFT also argued that the works weren’t kept confidential, submitting declarations that it was common practice for works like the drawings, operations manuals, and software at issue to be freely exchanged in the industry and given to customers without restriction; products and equipment were regularly shown at trade shows and made available for unrestricted inspection at public auction. CVD submitted conflicting evidence, including evidence that the company used nondisclosure agreements with customers (though the agreements don’t seem to have specified what counted as confidential information, raising the question of whether the drawings, manuals, etc. were actually covered).

Given these factual disputes, the court declined to grant summary judgment to the counterdefendants. On the state law counterclaims, the court rejected PFT’s preemption defense because the extra element of breach of duty was allegedly present – even with respect to the unjust enrichment state-law claims. That holding seems shaky, given that unjust enrichment doesn’t require that extra element, unlike the trade secret claims. The elements of unjust enrichment are that the defendant benefited at the plaintiff’s expense and that in equity and good conscience the defendant should make restitution – that’s a tort that can be committed just by copying, in the absence of preemption. Adding in breach of duty in this specific case to avoid preemption is transforming the tort.

The court also rejected PFT’s claims for false advertising under New York law, because CVD’s conduct wasn’t consumer-oriented and didn’t affect the public at large, given the highly specialized goods and services at issue. The Lanham Act has no such limit, and the court found disputed issues of fact on the federal claims and the state-law tortious interference claims.

Posted by mikki at 01:10 PM | Permalink

Nintendo sued over alleged Wii Remote patent violation:

Point and click

Nintendo has found itself on the receiving end of a lawsuit alleging the company ripped off a US patent that California-based plaintiff Interlink Electronics was granted back in February 2005 as a result of a September 1997 application.…

Posted by mikki at 10:35 AM | Permalink

JPEG Patent Claim Surrendered!:


Here you go, straight from the Public Patent Foundation's press release: Forgent Networks has stopped asserting its patent against JPEG, has dropped all its pending cases that were
asserting the patent, and says that it won't file any other infringement claims based on the patent. You'll recall that PubPat challenged the patent last year and the USPTO reexamination led to rejection of the broadest claims.

On its website page on the Forgent Networks JPEG Related Patent, PubPat provides the history:

PUBPAT filed a formal request with the United States Patent and Trademark Office in November 2005 to revoke the patent Forgent Networks Inc. (Nasdaq: FORG) is widely asserting against the Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) international standard for the electronic sharing of photo-quality images. In its filing, PUBPAT submitted previously unseen prior art showing that the patent, which was issued in 1987 to Forgent's subsidiary Compression Labs Inc., was not new and, as such, should be revoked. The PTO granted PUBPAT's request in February 2006 and rejected the broadest claims of the patent in May 2006. In November 2006, Forgent abandoned all assertion of the patent.

You can get the legal filing and the USPTO orders from that page. Hey, sometimes there's good news. Not all the news stories can be about somebody's corporate strategy to steal Red Hat's customers.

Posted by mikki at 07:47 PM | Permalink

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

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

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

The Seattle Times: Business & Technology: Irked customer spurs patent study:


At the request of a New Zealand actor upset about a slow book delivery, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is re-examining Amazon.com's patent for "1-Click" online shopping, which allows pre-registered users to buy items with a single click of the mouse.

Actor Peter Calveley sought the reconsideration in documents filed in February, pointing out that a patent for similar technology was issued in March 1998, about 18 months before Amazon's. The Patent Office agreed last week that Calveley had raised a substantial question about the appropriateness of Amazon's patent, documents posted on its Web site show.

Calveley wrote on his blog that his crusade is revenge for an "annoyingly slow" book delivery from Amazon. He used the blog to raise the $2,520 re-examination fee.

Amazon spokeswoman Patty Smith said Thursday that Amazon "remains confident in the validity of its 1-Click patent."

Posted by mikki at 02:04 PM | Permalink

Creative slaps Apple with iPod patent suit - Law & Policy - Breaking Business and Technology News at silicon.com:


Singapore-based electronics maker Creative Technology said on Monday it has filed two legal actions against Apple, charging that the popular iPod MP3-player infringes on its patented technology.
In a complaint with the US International Trade Commission, Creative is seeking an injunction that would stop Apple from selling the iPod and iPod Nano in the US. Separately, Creative said it has also sued Apple in US District Court in California, seeking an injunction and damages.
In both cases, Creative says the iPod and iPod Nano infringe on a patent the company has for the interface in its Zen media player, a patent granted last August.
Creative CEO Sim Wong Hoo said in December the company would "aggressively pursue" those that infringed on its patent.
An Apple representative was not immediately available for comment.
Creative is not the first to seek a cut of Apple's iTunes and iPod revenue, citing patent issues. Pat-rights, a Hong Kong company, has said Apple's digital rights management technology infringes on its intellectual property, while another company - Contois Music & Technology - said the iTunes interface uses its patented technology.
Ina Fried writes for CNET News.com

Posted by mikki at 03:30 PM | Permalink

Patent office to look into peer review:


Blog: The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office this Friday will provide details about a pilot project for letting the public assist patent...

Posted by mikki at 12:53 PM | Permalink

blackenterprise.com:


In a verdict that could ripple across the pharmaceutical industry, a U.S. jury in a federal lawsuit has ruled that Eli Lilly infringed a patent covering drugs that work through one of the body's basic biological pathways.

The jury, sitting in U.S. District Court in Boston, on Thursday ordered Lilly to pay $65.2 million in back royalties to Ariad Pharmaceuticals, a biotechnology company that had licensed the patent from Harvard University and two other academic institutions. Lilly will also have to pay a 2.3 percent royalty on future U.S. sales of its osteoporosis drug Evista and its septic-shock drug Xigris.

The case has attracted attention because Ariad claims that the patent, issued in 2002, covers any drug that works by influencing the action of an important protein in the body. Some critics have said that patents covering an entire pathway in the body, as opposed to a particular drug, could hinder drug development.

Executives at Ariad have said that the patent could cover drugs with billions of dollars in annual sales and that it had sent letters offering licenses to more than 50 companies. Last week, the biotechnology giant Amgen filed a pre-emptive lawsuit against Ariad, seeking to shield its lucrative arthritis drug Enbrel from infringement charges based on the same patent.

Lilly argued in the trial that Ariad's patent covered a natural phenomenon and was therefore invalid. It also said its two drugs were under development before the protein at the heart of the Ariad patent was even discovered.

"The Ariad position is equivalent to discovering that gravity is the force that makes water run downhill and then demanding the owners of all the existing hydroelectric plants begin to pay patent royalties on their use of gravity," Lilly's general counsel, Robert Armitage, said Thursday in a statement.

Lilly said it would appeal if a request to set aside the verdict was refused by the trial judge, Rya Zobel. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is re-examining the validity of the patent at the request of Lilly.

Ariad's chairman and chief executive, Harvey Berger, disputed Lilly's arguments.

Posted by mikki at 03:29 PM | Permalink

Patent Baristas: Federal Circuit Sets Out Personal Jurisdiction Standard:


In Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc., the Federal Circuit summarized the standard for personal jurisdiction in patent cases.

Metabolite holds patents for a method of controlling hyperhomocysteinemia, a condition involving elevated serum metabolite levels, which is an emerging risk factor for heart and vascular disease, and its principal business involves licensing its patents to pharmaceutical manufacturing companies. PamLab has an exclusive license of the Metabolite patents and manufactures and distributes a prescription-only vitamin product containing a specific formulation of B12, folic acid and B6 marketed as FOLTX. Breckenridge, a generic drug company headquartered in Florida, manufactures a similar product, marketed as “Folbee”, which it sells as a substitute for FOLTX.

Posted by mikki at 07:52 PM | Permalink

InformationWeek | Business Innovation Powered By Technology:


Back in November 2004, Apple filed a patent for an "audio user interface for computing devices" such as "an MP3 player, a mobile phone, or a personal digital assistant." The patent application was just published today by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

The patent filing adds weight to speculation offered by a number of bloggers and journalists that Apple is working on a mobile phone, and it suggests that the iPod will eventually become a phone--an eminently sensible endgame for the device, assuming ease of use can be maintained.

In the abstract and noncommittal language of patent filings, Apple summarizes the invention as "an audio user interface that generates audio prompts that help a user navigate through the features of a computing device. The audio prompts provide audio indicators that allow a user to focus his or her visual attention upon other tasks such as driving an automobile, exercising, or crossing a street."

Posted by mikki at 11:04 AM | Permalink

CalTrade Report - US Threatens Action on China IPR Piracy:


WASHINGTON, DC - 05/01/06 - Once again China has topped the US annual list of countries criticized for inadequate protection of copyrights, patents and other intellectual property rights (IPR), the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) reports.

Regarding China, the USTR appeared to move closer to filing what would be the first-ever challenge in the World Trade Organization (WTO) against intellectual piracy and counterfeiting.

"Faced with only limited progress by China in addressing certain deficiencies in IPR protection and enforcement, the United States will step up consideration of its WTO dispute settlement options," the USTR report said.

Russia also came in for strong criticism in the 2006 report on implementation of a US law called Special 301. 

Posted by mikki at 08:56 AM | Permalink

TiVo scores patent win against EchoStar | CNET News.com:


update A Texas jury has awarded TiVo $73.9 million in damages after finding that EchoStar infringed on patents held by TiVo for digital video recorders.

TiVo sued EchoStar in 2004 for violating a patent on a "multimedia time warping system," which involved recording a program on one channel while watching another. The case was being closely watched by TiVo investors. The company has struggled to grow as set-top box makers incorporate DVR capabilities in their products.

"This decision recognizes that our intellectual property is valuable, and will ensure that moving forward EchoStar and any others that want to use our patented technology will be required to provide us with compensation," TiVo said in a statement.

EchoStar plans to appeal the verdict, it said in a statement. "This is the first step in a very long process and we are confident we will ultimately prevail. Among other things, we believe the patent--as interpreted in this case--is overly broad given the technology in existence when TiVo filed its patent...Additionally, the Patent Office is in the process of reexamining TiVo's patent, having determined there is a substantial question concerning the validity of the patent."

Posted by mikki at 08:58 PM | Permalink

Mannatech Successfully Enforces Its Ambrotose Patent Against a Nutritional Supplements Firm Based in the United Kingdom: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance:


COPPELL, Texas, April 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Global health and wellness leader Mannatech, Incorporated (Nasdaq: MTEX - News), has successfully enforced one of its product patents against Bion/Elphanta, a nutritional supplements firm based in the United Kingdom.

In an order filed with the High Court of Justice patents court in London, Bion agreed to stop breaching Mannatech's U.K. patent on technology related to Ambrotose complex, a unique glyconutritional formulation Mannatech introduced in 1996. Bion also agreed to stop the manufacture, sales and importation of all dietary supplements related to glyconutrition "in any form and by any means."

Mannatech filed the patent-infringement lawsuit in the U.K. against Bion and its principal in February 2005.

"Mannatech will defend its intellectual property and vigorously pursue infringements," said Bettina Simon, senior vice president and general counsel of Mannatech.

Posted by mikki at 10:26 AM | Permalink

Internet News Article | Reuters.com:


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Netflix Inc may face a tough fight in enforcing its patents for its pioneering online DVD rental service against rival Blockbuster Inc., but could reap substantial benefits if it wins or the companies settle, lawyers and analysts said on Wednesday.

Netflix on Tuesday sued Blockbuster in federal court in San Francisco, seeking an injunction to stop Blockbuster from infringing on two patents that protect Netflix's business method.

The patents cover Netflix's practice of having subscribers prioritize "queues," or lists of titles they want to rent, on Netflix's Web site, and of automatically replacing each DVD that is returned for the next title on the subscriber's queue.

Piper Jaffray analyst Safa Rashtchy likened the suit to one filed by Yahoo Inc. subsidiary Overture Services against Google Inc. in connection with claims that Google infringed on Overture's paid search patent.

Google ultimately settled the case by agreeing to take out a license to the Overture patent and several related patents for shares of Google stock worth about $450 million, according to the Web site of Overture's attorney, Robert Fram.

"Netflix really did create this model when no one else was doing online DVD rental and they made a business of it," Rashtchy said. "As far as I know, no one had created a monthly subscription model where you were not purchasing but renting."

Posted by mikki at 12:20 AM | Permalink

Dallas Business Journal: Mary Kay ordered to pay $26M-plus in patent infringement lawsuit - 2006-04-05:


Mary Kay Inc. was ordered to pay more than $26 million in back royalties to TriStrata Technology Inc. in connection with a patent infringement case.

A state district court in Wilmington, Del., on March 31, denied Addison-based Mary Kay's post-trial motions and ordered the cosmetics company to pay $26.4 million in back royalties to TriStrata, the company said Wednesday.

Mary Kay said in a statement Wednesday that it would begin an appeals process now that a court judgment has been issued in the case.

Mary Kay said the original lawsuit, filed in 2001, is related to products Mary Kay created in the 1990s using its own patented Alpha Hydroxy Acid technology. The company says it no longer markets products containing Alpha Hydroxy Acid technology because anti-aging skin care technology has advanced.

With interest, TriStrata says the total amount of the judgment is about $41.4 million.

The court also blocked Mary Kay from infringing on three patents that were part of the case.

Wilmington, Del.-based TriStrata develops alpha-hydroxyacid skin care technology and holds more than 125 patents related to alpha-hydroxyacids and other skin care technology.

Web sites: www.marykay.com and www.neostrata.com

Posted by mikki at 12:18 AM | Permalink

CC patent victory clarifies case law - 3 April 2006:


Clifford Chance has won a rare patent case after the London International Financial Futures Exchange (Liffe) won an important victory that clarifies case law regarding the owner of an invention.

Liffe prevailed in its High Court battle against ex-employee Dr Pavel Pinkava, who invented an electronic trading system while employed at Liffe.

Mr Justice Kitchin ruled that Liffe owned the IP rights to the system, despite the fact that Pinkava had patented his invention in the US and set up a company called De Novo to hold the patents.

Kitchin J found that Liffe owned the IP rights because the "inventions were made in the course of the duties which were assigned to Dr Pinkava".

Kitchin J's approach was to look at Pinkava's job description to determine whether Liffe had paid him to come up with such inventions as part of his job.

Posted by mikki at 12:30 PM | Permalink

DesMoinesRegister.com:


Two Des Moines companies have found themselves in the middle of separate trademark disputes, with one also being accused of patent infringement by one of the nation's largest makers of health care products.

Johnson & Johnson and a subsidiary, McNeil-PPC Inc., sued Qualis Inc. last week in U.S. District Court in Des Moines. They alleged that Qualis has spent the past two years selling "warming liquid personal lubricants" to three major pharmacy chains in packages that look remarkably like those produced by McNeil's K-Y brand.

Johnson & Johnson also alleged that since February, Qualis has violated its patent on the composition and methods of use for the K-Y Warming Liquid. The plaintiffs said their product is used, among other things, to "enhance the intimacy of the sexual experience."

Posted by mikki at 06:50 PM | Permalink

RED HERRING | Methods Patents Go to Court:


In a case that could have broad implications in the biotech industry and elsewhere, the question of whether or not natural phenomena are patentable will come before the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday.
 
Laboratory Corp. v. Metabolite Laboratories, a patent infringement case regarding diagnostic methods, was appealed to the high court to determine if laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are patentable.
 
While a decision could significantly impact the hotly contested topics of software and business method patents, the court would have to stray significantly from the case history to do so.
 
In fact, the U.S. solicitor general has recommended that the court not make a determination on whether or not the patent is valid, because that issue had not been developed in the lower courts.
 

Posted by mikki at 01:31 PM | Permalink

Philadelphia Business Journal: European patent for CollaGenex rosacea drug - 2006-03-21:


The European Patent Office on Tuesday issued a notice of allowance for CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals' patent application covering the use of sub-antimicrobial doxycycline in the treatment of acne and rosacea.

The Newtown, Pa., pharmaceutical company is seeking approval of its new drug candidate Oracea, which contains doxycycline, for the treatment of rosacea in Europe and the United States.

"This notice of allowance by the European Patent Office is another important milestone as we seek to maximize the value of Oracea ," said Colin W. Stewart, president and CEO of CollaGenex (NASDAQ:CGPI). "As we engage in discussions with potential European partners for rights to market Oracea in Europe, we are working to enhance the value of this asset by seeking intellectual property protections and pursuing regulatory marketing approval."

Posted by mikki at 01:30 PM | Permalink

EETimes.com - Analysis: Winning the patent game in Asia:


We've heard so much about it over the last several years that intellectual property (IP) issues hardly get us excited. Yes, we all know about both sides of the story — the complaints by both patent holders mostly outside Asia and those in Asia new to the patent regime.
A recent report by the U.S.-based Manufacturing Policy Project concludes that companies from countries with weak IP protection are copying technologies from unprotected patent applications that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and Japan's Patent Office (JPO) post on the Internet. The JPO found out that its applications are being examined about 17,000 times daily from China and 50,000 times daily from South Korea.

The report claims that Chinese pirates and counterfeiters are now defending themselves with a new technique called “A Great Wall of Patents.” This process involves filing for patents in China for the products copied. The applications are claimed to use modified drawings and descriptions taken from the patent office Internet sites in the United States, Europe and Japan.

The report finds three patent crises for the United States: piracy costs U.S. IP owners about $50 billion a year; patent pendency rates are close to 30 months, which is impeding introduction of newer and better technologies; and the U.S. 18-month rule allows copying of proprietary U.S. technology.

The industry has often said that once IP violators become IP owners, both the respect for IP and its protection will increase. The good news for everyone involved is that IP ownership is indeed gaining ground in Asia, according to statistics from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The WIPO, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, is a specialized agency of the United Nations. It administers the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), which involves 128 countries, and 22 other international treaties dealing with IP protection.

Posted by mikki at 01:28 PM | Permalink

Semiconductor International - Cognex Acts to Protect Customers from Abusive Patent Trolling; Lawsuit Against Acacia Research Corporation and Veritec Seeks Declaration of Invalidity, Unenforceability, and Non-Infringement of 2D Symbology Patent:


Cognex Corporation (NASDAQ: CGNX), the world's leading supplier of machine vision systems, announced today that it has served a complaint against Acacia Research Corporation and Veritec, Inc. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court in Minnesota.

Cognex is seeking a declaration that U.S. Patent 5,612,524, which claims to cover a system for reading 2D symbology, is invalid, unenforceable, and not infringed by either Cognex or by any users of Cognex products. The patent has not been asserted against Cognex, but, nevertheless, Cognex has taken this action to protect its customers who have received demand letters.

"Cognex firmly believes in the right of inventors and patent holders to seek licensing fees for legitimate, patented technology. But, we strongly object when questionable patents are used to extort payments from companies that do not have the expertise to challenge the patents, or who, for business reasons, decide to submit to licensing demands rather than to undertake costly legal challenges," said Dr. Robert J. Shillman, Cognex's Chairman and CEO.

Posted by mikki at 11:44 AM | Permalink

TradingMarkets.com - Daytrading, Eminis, Forex trading, Swing Trading:


(RTTNews) - Thursday, Oracle Corp. (ORCL | charts | news | Powerrating) said that it has won summary judgment in a significant patent infringement suit concerning its clustered database software. The ruling ends the proceedings against Oracle, but allows Oracle to proceed on its claims that MangoSoft's patent is invalid and unenforceable.

On March 14, 2006, the U.S. District Court in New Hampshire ruled in favor of Oracle on its motion for summary judgment that it did not infringe a patent held by MangoSoft, Inc. MangoSoft sued Oracle in 2002, claiming infringement of its patent on shared memory technology. It sought an injunction to stop Oracle from further sales of its software and over $500 Million in damages.

Oracle spokesperson Deborah Hellinger, said, "The case is an important victory for Oracle. This decision eliminates the threat to continued sales and revenues, and demonstrates the company's resolve to vigorously defend against unfounded claims attacking its products."

Posted by mikki at 07:15 AM | Permalink

The Korea Times : Hynix Faces Patent Lawsuit in US:


Hynix Semiconductor faces the prospect of paying U.S. research firm Rambus up to $150 million in penalties for violating patent arrangements. The trial began in a U.S. court this week.

This is the third known legal battle facing the Korean semiconductor maker in the recent months, following the conviction of its executives for chip price-fixing in the U.S., and a formal complaint by Japan about alleged subsidization.

Hynix, the world’s second largest DRAM (dynamic random access memory) maker, is being sued by Rambus for infringing its patents of DRAM from 2000. After a six-years of legal saber rattling, the jury trial started on Monday with a verdict expected within a month. The verdict could order Hynix to pay royalties for its $4.4 billion sales in the United States since 2000.

Posted by mikki at 06:27 PM | Permalink

Java Start-Up Sues Sun Over Software Patents @ SYS-CON AUSTRALIA:


A dispute over Azul's alleged infringement of Sun's patents has taken a new twist, with the small Java firm claiming that it has been threatened. Azul Systems, a company selling hardware to run Java programs, has sued Sun Microsystems in a dispute about software patent fees and royalties. Azul filed for declaratory relief on 15 March, 2006, "to protect the interests of the company in the face of unfounded allegations from Sun Microsystems". Azul says the larger company threatened to sue if it didn't pay an "exorbitant" amount, giving Sun part ownership.

Azul wants a judge in the Northern California region's US District Court to declare a judgment against Sun that Azul doesn't infringe a list of 20 Sun patents or that those patents are invalid, according to a complaint filed by the company. Several of those patents involve processors running multiple tasks at once - a technology that both Sun and Azul are pursuing through development of multicore chips.

Sun’s reacted by stating, "Sun has spent over a year trying to achieve a business resolution to Azul's unauthorized use of Sun intellectual property. During this period, Azul has repeatedly stonewalled and delayed. The latest example of this behavior is the filing of the present action despite an agreement the parties entered into allowing additional time for business negotiations to take place, and despite the fact the parties were exploring additional avenues of resolving this dispute."

Posted by mikki at 06:24 PM | Permalink

New 2ME2 Patent Strengthens EntreMed's Position in Cancer and Non-Oncology Diseases:


ROCKVILLE, Md., March 16 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- EntreMed, Inc. (Nasdaq: ENMD), a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing therapeutics for the treatment of cancer and inflammatory diseases, today announced the issuance of U.S. Patent No. 7,012,070 covering methods of treatment for a broad range of indications with its lead clinical-stage compound, 2-methoxyestradiol (2ME2). Panzem(R) NCD, an oral formulation of 2ME2, is currently in Phase 2 clinical trials for cancer. Panzem(R) is also in preclinical development for rheumatoid arthritis. (Logo: Newscom: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20010620/ENMDLOGO )

Patent No. 7,012,070, entitled "Estrogenic Compounds as Anti-Mitotic Agents," contains claims granted by the U.S. Patent Office covering 2ME2 for the treatment of multiple indications, including cancer and inflammatory disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis. The patent claims cover methods of treating a broad range of disease indications with 2ME2 that is independent of mechanism, including solid tumors or tumor metastases, immune and inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis. The patent is owned by Children's Hospital Boston and licensed exclusively worldwide to EntreMed, Inc Panzem(R) (2ME2) is a novel anticancer agent, which is part of a next generation of antimitotic cancer drugs that bind to tubulin and work through multiple cellular pathways. 2ME2 can attack tumors on multiple fronts -- directly by disrupting microtubules, an intracellular matrix necessary for the rapid division of cancer cells (mitosis), by inducing programmed cell death (apoptosis), and by blocking blood vessels that feed tumors (angiogenesis inhibition).

Posted by mikki at 11:53 AM | Permalink

BetaNews | Sun Partner Cries Foul in Patent Spat:


Mountain View, Calif.-based Java hardware company Azul filed for declaratory relief in order to "protect the interests of the company" from Sun Microsystems, the company said in a statement Wednesday.

Azul says Sun is attempting to force the company into paying an "exorbitant" sum of money to settle patent infringement allegations, as well as demanding part ownership of Azul and high up-front fees and royalties on the hardware the company sells.

If Azul does not comply, Sun has threatened with legal action, according to the allegations.

"Attempts to reach an agreement failed when Sun gave Azul an ultimatum: accept its final proposal or face litigation," Azul said in a statement. The company says the issues surround claims that it has misappropriated trade secrets and infringed on Sun's patents.

Posted by mikki at 10:21 PM | Permalink

blackenterprise.com:


ProactiveNet Inc., the time-to-value leader in Business Services Management (BSM), today announced it has received its third U.S. Patent. This third patent (No. 6,816,898) extends the company's technology leadership position for IT service analytics and further strengthens the protection of ProactiveNet's intellectual property.

The patent describes a methodology that enables ProactiveNet to easily pull in performance data, in real-time, from any external source. The value in this technology is that ProactiveNet customers can easily add their own custom metrics, which are then leveraged by ProactiveNet's patented data correlation and analytics engine. In fact, ProactiveNet is the only BSM solution that can link customized data and key business metrics, such as online dollar sales per hour, with detailed performance data from the end-to-end IT infrastructure in real-time.

Posted by mikki at 12:46 PM | Permalink

Government Sides Against EBay in Patent Dispute:


The federal government yesterday took a position against eBay Inc. in a patent dispute that threatens to shut down one of the online auction site's popular shopping features.

The Office of the Solicitor General said in a brief filed with the Supreme Court that eBay willfully infringed on patents held by Great Falls-based MercExchange LLC and should be enjoined from using its "Buy It Now" feature, which allows users to buy goods at fixed prices rather than compete in auctions. Goods sold using that system account for about a third of eBay's business.

Posted by mikki at 08:35 AM | Permalink

GLASS ON WEB - Glass News - Court Ruling Upholds Corning Patent:


Corning Incorporated announced that the United States District Court for the District of Delaware has issued a ruling in its favor. The Court's ruling declared fully enforceable a patent exclusively licensed to Corning for optical biosensors that enable label-independent detection of chemical, biochemical and biological substances in a sample. The Court further concluded that Corning is entitled to a permanent injunction against SRU Biosystems of Woburn, MA, which infringed on the patent and induced a customer to infringe the patent through its testing activities.

Posted by mikki at 08:33 AM | Permalink

Seventh US Patent Issued to Analytical Spectral Devices, Inc. Related to Verification of Pharmaceuticals:


Analytical Spectral Devices, Inc. (ASD), manufacturer of precision analytical instruments for real-time, field based material identification and verification, announced today that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued Patent Number 7,006,214 related to ASD’s innovative solution, RxSpec® technology.

Boulder, Colo., March 10, 2006 — Analytical Spectral Devices, Inc. (ASD), manufacturer of precision analytical instruments for real-time, field based material identification and verification, announced today that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued Patent Number 7,006,214 related to ASD’s innovative solution, RxSpec® technology.

“This is ASD’s seventh patent covering pharmaceutical verification and the second patent specifically related to our RxSpec® drug verification solution” says Dave Rzasa, President and CEO. “These patents further strengthen ASD’s leadership position in providing solutions to furthering pharmacist productivity, while at the same time combating counterfeits.”

ASD’s patented RxSpec® technology utilizes a combined visible and near infrared spectroscopy inspection system to directly check the prescription drug while in the dispensing vial. The real-time measurement is sensitive to chemical composition, color, and dosage level. The measured “chemical fingerprint” is compared to an extensive known database, thereby providing absolute assurance that the dispensed drug is correct in both type and concentration, regardless of similarity in appearance. In seconds, RxSpec® technology verifies the identity and dosage of a prescription drug dispensed by a pharmacy, thereby reducing potentially harmful filling errors, as well as detecting counterfeit drugs. And because RxSpec® technology is non-destructive, it can be used to inspect 100% of the prescriptions prepared by a pharmacy.

Posted by mikki at 08:30 AM | Permalink

BlackBerry hits the acquisition path - Breaking - Technology - smh.com.au:


The maker of BlackBerry email devices, fresh from settling a lawsuit that threatened its very business, is buying a company that will allow it to marry BlackBerries with corporate phone systems.

"It makes your BlackBerry perform just like your desktop phone," said Jim Balsillie, co-chief executive of the company behind the BlackBerry, Research in Motion Ltd.

RIM announced Friday that it has bought Ascendent Systems, a company that makes software for connecting mobile-phones to a corporate phone switch, or PBX.

Ascendent's software will be merged into RIM's later this year, enabling office-phone functions like simultaneous ringing at several locations, call transfer and spontaneous teleconferencing, Balsillie said.

The two companies have been partners, but Ascendent's software was sold separately. Balsillie said it will work with any type of PBX.

"So many of our customers were asking for the functionality of Ascendent, it really made it natural to start to integrate it into the core offering," Balsillie said.

Posted by mikki at 05:59 PM | Permalink

WAVY.COM - Virginia company suing Missouri utility firm:


KANSAS CITY, Mo. A Virginia company has filed a federal patent infringement lawsuit against Kansas City Power and Light, in Missouri.

The lawsuit was filed in Kansas City by attorneys for Georgia Technologies, based in McLean, Virginia. It claims that K-C-P-and-L has been illegally using the other company's patented technology in the utility's electronic billing system.
The system allows K-C-P-and-L customers to view their statements and pay bills from their home computers.
The lawsuit asks a judge to order the utility to stop using the technology. It also seeks triple damages for the alleged infringement.

Posted by mikki at 05:14 PM | Permalink

SEMA - "Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act":


found 2006-03-12 17:10:23

Posted by mikki at 01:09 PM | Permalink

Get the latest IP related decisions and office notices dated 12 March 2006:


Latest news about intellectual property, patents, trademarks, ...

Posted by mikki at 11:10 AM | Permalink

Building IP Portfolios Based On Competitive Intelligence:

One way to develop an intellectual property portfolio is to use up-to-date and accurate competitive intelligence on industry competitors as a map to lay out your company’s intellectual property procurement and enforcement strategies.

Competitive intelligence is an ongoing initiative to discover, analyze and use intelligence on competitors’ intellectual property, sales, marketing, regulatory filings and other publicly available information to become more competitive in the marketplace.

Compiling competitive intelligence is an ongoing process. Using modern technology as well as more traditional methods, it is less difficult than ever before to keep tabs on industry players.

The Internet is a key source to use to identify intellectual property (both published and issued patents for example), learn about marketing strategies on company websites, and look up publicly available information about products submitted for regulatory approval. There are also subscription services that deliver information. For example, services exist that tabulate marketing and sales data for specific industries. It is also possible to obtain information through common sources, i.e., vendors, manufacturers and distributors that work with multiple competitors. Lastly, it is possible to collect valuable information at industry trade shows and conferences.

Posted by mikki at 11:08 AM | Permalink

Accounting, Tax and Reporting Treatments For Patents: