January 27, 2010
The Problem with the PTO Pilot Program to Accelerate Examination of “Green Technologies”
Back in December, the USPTO announced a pilot program to accelerate examination of patent applications directed to “green technologies.” Oddly enough, this announcement came just before the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Denmark. I will refrain from ranting about the politics of this, but I only wonder if the USPTO will decide to accelerate examination of those technologies that may have an impact on any other upcoming international conferences. I think national defense and anti-terrorism are pretty big topics nowadays, but I still have not seen anything in the Federal Register about accelerated examinations of patent applications in those fields. Well, enough of that.
The pilot program aims to decrease the pendency time for patent applications in certain green technologies. The current pending time (i.e., number of months between filing an application and receiving a final decision), according to the article, is about 40 months – with an average of 30 months passing before a first Office Action is mailed to the applicant. By my count, that’s not bad compared to several other technological fields. I represent some clients that have patent applications which have been pending for going on four years. The pilot program is open to the first 3000 patent applications related to green technologies in which a proper petition is filed.
January 25, 2010
Southern Cal beats up on South Carolina… in a trademark dispute
Those of you who know me know that I am a sports junkie. GO JETS – sorry, I had to find a way to subtly get that one in there. If you are reading this and thinking that you are about to hear me rant and rave about coaching changes or NCAA violations at Southern Cal, you are in for a surprise. This is a true intellectual property dispute between two schools with teams that I don’t particularly appreciate and with football coaches that are not on my top ten list (especially you Kiffin).
Anyway, the Trojans of Southern California have dealt a trademark blow to the South Carolina Gamecocks. This dispute revolves around the logos for each school and, more specifically, the logos that each school prints on their apparel. South Carolina appealed a decision from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board refusing to register the school’s logo and also refusing to cancel a Southern California trademark. The Federal Circuit upheld both decisions.
January 21, 2010
The “Departure” of Conan O’Brien Brings Up Intellectual Property Issues
So unless you go to bed at 8PM (which I wish I did) or you don’t have a television, you have probably heard that Conan O’Brien’s attempt at hosting the coveted 11:30 time slot for NBC’s late night talk show will be short lived. NBC is bumping Conan and going back to Jay Leno. Personally, I used to watch Leno as I was falling asleep and found his skits to be somewhat humorous – Jaywalking, Battle of the Jaywalk Allstars, Headlines, etc. I never really stayed up late enough to watch Conan’s skits, but I am somewhat familiar with them – the talking picture thing, Triumph the Insult Dog (one of my personal favorites), etc.
As you probably know, the NBC late night debacle has been pretty contentious. My personal favorite was during Conan’s monologue a few nights ago when he was noting that hosting the Tonight Show, even for a short period of time, was the fulfillment of a lifelong dream. He went on to give some advice to the kids out there – “you can do whatever you want to do… so long as Jay Leno doesn’t want to do it too.”
Don’t confuse media whine pieces for *real* IP bully stories
If you’ve been reading this blog for any period of time, you know that we like to point out when intellectual property owners try to use their IP to stomp on the little guy. One should not confuse our material with that of whiny media types who try to paint IP owners in a negative light for using their rights correctly. Professor Randazza has posted about an excellent example of this kind of misinformed, crybaby reporting. In pointing out the inadequacy of one publication’s legal research, Marco manages to give us all a lesson in trademark registration basics.
January 20, 2010
Space Coast Business Magazine prints one of our articles
We put together a quick overview (800-words-or-less) about patents and copyrights for Space Coast Business Magazine, and they ran with it in their January issue. You can read the full text here
January 19, 2010
Removing “Confusion” with Trademarks
Trademarks are a huge part of everyone’s daily lives; yet the laws that dictate their use and abuse are not nearly as well known. A single trip to the grocery store may expose you to literally thousands of trademarks. There are the ones you expect to see (e.g., the word “Kellogg’s” on that box of cereal, or that jovial peanut wearing a top hat) and the ones you are hardly even aware of (e.g., the emblem on the front of the car that you parked next to in the lot, or that familiar swoosh on the sneakers of the woman behind you in the checkout line). Each of those words or symbols represents an important mechanism for lubricating the wheels of commerce, providing a shortcut for you (or your intended customer) to make informed purchase decisions. The economic advantage of trademarks lies in their ability to quickly convey, by association, a wealth of information about the quality, value, and reputation of a product, or its producer.
As an example, when someone goes shopping for clothing, they are able to quickly pick out which garments are desirable, and which ones are not, simply by looking at the tag or emblem stitched on the left breast. If you see a silhouette of a man riding on a horse and swinging a polo mallet, you immediately know something about the characteristics of that shirt, whether it’s from your own experience or from what you may have heard from other satisfied purchasers. You know a little something about the quality and whether it falls into your intended price range – all without having to spend the time, effort, and expense of buying one of each brand of shirt and conducting your own comparative analysis. You know, before even opening it, that when you take a sip from that can that has “Coca-Cola” printed on it, it will taste a certain way, and you likely made your purchase (or selected the one with “Pepsi” printed on it instead) based on that knowledge.
January 12, 2010
What type of patent application is right for me?
Generally speaking, a patent is a grant, by the government, for a fixed period of time, of the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, or offering for sale an invention as defined in the claims of a patent. (For more information, check our our Overview of U.S. Patent Protection.) Of course, the first step in the patent process is filing a patent application. There are several different types of patent applications that can be filed by an inventor. What follows is a brief outline of the types of patent applications that can be applied for, as well as the differences between them all. The patent applications that will be discussed below are Provisional Patent Applications, Utility Patent Applications (sometimes called Nonprovisional Patent Applications), Design Patent Applications, and Plant Patent Applications.
January 5, 2010
Paris Hilton continues her IP education… from the defendant’s chair
After getting the go-ahead from the Ninth Circuit earlier this year on her “That’s Hot!” trademark infringement case against Hallmark, hotel heiress Paris Hilton has apparently signed up (although unwillingly) for another intellectual property lesson. This time, she’s going to be studying design patents. Her professor, a footwear designer called Gwyneth Shoes, claims that its design patent has been infringed by Ms. Hilton’s kicks. (Source.)
If you look closely, you can see the heart.
Design patent protection is similar to copyright protection, in that the alleged infringer is in trouble if they’ve produced something that is substantially similar to the protected design. However, while the government simply gives out copyright registrations, upon request, design patents are only awarded after an examination is done and it has been determined that the proposed design is novel (i.e., no one else has previously designed a product like this).
Gwyneth’s design
The prize for successfully prosecuting a design patent application? Complete national monopoly for 14 years. Since copyright protection lasts for a minimum of 70 years, some people would argue that a design patent is hardly worth the effort and cost. The problem with that logic is that copyrights come with a whole boatload of limitations, leaving room for potential defendants to get away free. As a key example, fair use and independent creation are no defense to a charge of design patent infringement. Just ask Paris Hilton, who undoubtedly has just learned about this little wrinkle from her attorney.
January 3, 2010
New Precedential Software Decision from the Board of Patent Appeals and Inteferences
As our readers know, we are anxiously awaiting the decision from the U.S. Supreme Court in the Bilski case (coverage here and here). This attorney, for one, is very much so wondering what will happen to software patents. I’ve made it no secret that I believe that patents should be granted to software based inventions. I think this would provide incentive for the industry to come out with more innovation. Look at what software has done for us just in the field of patents. It wasn’t more than 20 years ago that patent attorneys were dictating patents and secretaries were transcribing them on typewriters. It was about 10 years ago that the most common way for us to file our patent applications and our responses to office actions was to just mail them. I wonder when the patent office will catch up with the trademark office and send out Office Actions and other communications via email?
I am completely fine with the test set forth by the Federal Circuit in their decision in Bilski, but let’s not be too surprised if the Supreme Court tweaks it a little. To be fair, Bilski is technically not a software patent case. It does have ramifications on the software industry, but there are other industries that can be impacted by the Bilski decision. In my opinion, the § 101 argument will not be over until the courts finally come down with precedent in each of the affected technology areas. The areas that I think there will eventually be precedential decisions in are, of course, software, pharmaceutical and, very soon, pure business methods patents (which are all but dead anyway).
