Covers matters such as the taking, publication, licensing, and policing of photographs and other issues frequently implicated in photography such as authorship, privacy rights, and the posting of works on social media….
Publications
Irwin IP Publications is the go-to resource for the latest updates and insights in the world of intellectual property. Over 250 articles are published on cases addressing unique issues, all of which can be found using the search tool below. Additionally, there is a collection of articles/papers and presentations that cover a wide range of topics. Whether you’re a legal professional, business owner, or simply someone passionate about IP, our publications page will provide you with all the knowledge needed to navigate this dynamic field.
In Airbus S.A.S. v. Firepass Corp., the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that had held a patent directed to an athletic training and therapeutic chamber (used to simulate training at high altitude) was not analogous art against claims directed towards fire suppression methods. Case…
A panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a decision by the Central District of California dismissing a complaint brought against Taylor Swift alleging that she stole the lyrics for her hit song “Shake It Off.” The District Court dismissed the complaint on the basis…
The Federal Circuit unanimously held that all Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) were Principal Officers who bypassed the constitutionally required Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation process, thus violating the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution art. II, § 2, cl. 2. In the same opinion, the Federal Circuit corrected the…
The Central District of California recently ruled on summary judgment that Ironhawk Technologies, Inc.’s, (“Ironhawk”) “SmartSync” mark was descriptive and entitled to little or no protection. The District Court’s analysis relied on the Ninth Circuit’s Sleekcraft eight factor likelihood of confusion test1 and particularly concluded that Ironhawk’s “SmartSync” mark…
Any new rule or pilot program by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) is important to both prospective petitioners and patent owners because both parties should consider all available options when appearing in a proceeding before the Board. In three Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceedings for Mylan…
Motiva alleged that HTC directly, indirectly, and willfully infringed of a number of Motiva’s patents directed to video game and virtual reality systems. HTC moved to dismiss two of Motiva’s claims, arguing that Motiva failed to adequately plead its claims for indirect and willful infringement. Specifically, HTC argued that…
American Axle & Manufacturing (“AAM”) sued its competitor NeapCo Holdings LLC (“NeapCo”) for patent infringement in December of 2015, alleging infringement of its method patent relating to manufacturing driveshafts with liners to reduce noise and vibration during use. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment as to the eligibility of…
In SIPCO, LLC v. Emerson Elec. Co., the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s construction of a claim term critical to determining whether SIPCO’s patent concerning wireless inter-device communication qualified for review as a covered business method (“CBM”) patent, remanding to the Board for further consideration…
In a case of first impression, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals addressed whether claim language specifying a specific article of manufacture can limit the scope of a design patent, even if that article of manufacture is not actually illustrated in the figures. The Court found the answer to…
When faced with determining the scope of protection in a social media influencer’s “character,” the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York concluded that omitting the key features of the influencer’s “character” can preclude claims of copyright infringement, even though the accused character appeared to…
The Ninth Circuit recently held that the district court did not err when it ruled that Allstate’s “Drivewise” mark—which Allstate conceded was merely suggestive and for which Allstate failed to establish the level of its marketplace recognition—was only entitled to a narrow scope of protection and could not be…
Recently, the Precedential Opinion Panel (“POP”) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) overturned a previous PTAB panel’s decision to institute inter partes review (“IPR”) and held that “service of a pleading asserting a claim alleging infringement triggers the one-year time period for a petitioner to file a…
In Ennio Morricone Music Inc. v. Bixio Music Group Ltd, the Second Circuit tackled the “knotty” issue of whether a composer’s score was a “work made for hire” under Italian copyright law. The court ultimately determined that a composer’s film scores were not “works made for hire,” under Italian…
In MyMail, the Federal Circuit vacated the lower court’s judgment and remanded the case on the basis of the Federal Circuit’s new requirement that lower courts construe claims, first, before making any decision as to a patent’s eligibility. Here, the patent dispute arose between MyMail, LTD (“MyMail”) and ooVoo…
Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) and VirnetX Inc. (“VirnetX”) have been feuding over several patents relating to secured communications over the internet since 2010 when VirnetX sued Apple in district court. Apple argued that the patents were invalid as anticipated by or obvious in light of the prior art. Apple lost…
On consecutive days two district courts faced the same question—does a patent infringement plaintiff who sued before establishing common ownership over a terminally disclaimed patent have standing?—but arrived at opposite answers. On July 25, 2019, the Eastern district of Pennsylvania held a case must be dismissed because such a…
Continuing its narrow application of Article III standing in inter partes review (“IPR”) appeals, the Federal Circuit recently held that General Electric Company (“GE”) lacked Article III standing to appeal the Final Written Decision of an IPR that it had instituted against United Technologies Corporation, determining that GE did…
Continuing its narrow application of Article III standing in inter partes review (“IPR”) appeals, the Federal Circuit recently held that General Electric Company (“GE”) lacked Article III standing to appeal the Final Written Decision of an IPR that it had instituted against United Technologies Corporation, determining that GE did…
In a victory for KAB Brands, the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB (the “Board”)’s refusal to register the applied-for mark, APOGÉE for perfumery.1 KAB Brands is the owner of two federally registered trademarks: APHOGEE and ApHOGEE used in connection with hair products. The trademark office refused to register Louis…