Search Results (10294)
Documents on Intellectual Property
Show: results per page
|Supreme Court Decision Impacts Strategic Decision Making for Trademark Enforcement|
Daniel I. Schloss; Greenberg Traurig, LLP;
April 17, 2015, previously published on March 25, 2015On March 24, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, in some cases, decisions made by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office can preclude courts from addressing the same issue decided by the TTAB. The case is B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries,...
|When Does A Company Own An Invention Absent A Clear Agreement With The Inventor?|
Tyler Nechiporenko; Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh;
April 16, 2015, previously published by IP
Update — Canada, Smart & Biggar’s Canadian intellectual
property and technology law updateThe recent decision by the Supreme Court of British Columbia in Nature-Control Technologies Inc v Li (¿the Nature-Control decision¿), 2014 BCSC 1868, illustrates that it is important for a company to have clear agreements for ownership of inventions made not only by its employees but also by...
|Clearing Up the Confusion as to Preclusion: Supreme Court’s Trademark Ruling Gives Deference to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB)|
Thomas F. Bergert, Neil Magnuson, Amy G. Marino, Richard T. Matthews, Robert C. Van Arnam; Williams Mullen;
April 15, 2015, previously published on March 27, 2015 The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that federal court decisions on “likelihood of confusion” can be precluded by earlier findings on the same issue from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”). Following an 18-year fight between B&B Hardware Inc. and Hargis...
|“Raging Bull” Settles but Its Repercussions Persist|
Laura A. Alos, Adam R. Bialek, Gregory N. Brescia; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
April 15, 2015, previously published on April 9, 2015The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., et al., 134 S. Ct. 1962 (U.S. 2014) delivered a clear message to copyright holders and those who wish to capitalize on those copyrights. The ruling states that invoking laches cannot restrict the relief...
|Business Delays in Opening a Canadian Establishment Found not Sufficient to Support Non-Use Of The Mark STK|
Adrian J. Howard, Beverley Moore, Chantal Saunders; Borden Ladner Gervais LLP;
April 14, 2015, previously published on March 04, 2015This is an appeal from a decision of the Registrar who refused to expunge the Respondent’s mark pursuant to section 45 of the Trademarks Act. The mark STK (the “Mark”) was registered in 2008 for a high energy, female-friendly steakhouse.
|Bitcoin: Is It a Viable Security Asset?|
Martin Fanning, James Marsden, Adam Pierce; Dentons Canada LLP;
April 14, 2015, previously published on March 31, 2015In its short history, Bitcoin has generated a huge amount of commentary and has polarised views. Some see it as a game-changing, revolutionary form of currency. Others find it hard to see beyond its undoubted immediate problems, in particular its volatile value and its lack of regulation and...
|The Procedure for Allocation of Spectrum for DTT (Mux-8) Has Now Started|
Karol Laskowski, Igor Ostrowski; Dentons Canada LLP;
April 14, 2015, previously published on March 18, 2015On 12 March 2015 the President of the Polish Office for Electronic Communications (Polish: UKE) announced a contest for frequency reservations in the 174 - 230 MHz band, dedicated for the eighth multiplex (MUX-8) of Digital Terrestrial TV (DTT). The bidders have until April 29, 2015 to make their...
|USPTO Provides 8 Examples of Abstract Idea Analysis for Patent Eligible Subject Matter|
Staas Halsey LLP;
April 14, 2015, previously published on February 13, 2015In December 16, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") issued the “2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility” (“Guidance”) in light of decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, including Mayo, Myriad, and Alice Corp. The USPTO...
|Results Are In: Year of the Horse Ends with a Record Fine of USD 975 Million for Qualcomm|
Hannah C. L. Ha, John M. Hickin; Mayer Brown JSM;
April 14, 2015, previously published on February 18, 2015On 10 February 2015, China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) announced that it was imposing fines of RMB 6.088 billion (approximately USD 975 million) on Qualcomm for abusing its dominant position in the CDMA, WCDMA and LTE wireless communication standard essential patents...
Adam R. Bialek; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;