ip seminar ppt

7/17/2019 IP Seminar PPT

1/67

Intellectual PropertyIntellectual Property

on the Webon the WebTrademark, Copyright and

Patent Issues That Impact AllCompanies in the Internet Age

The material provided herein is for informationalpurposes only and is not intended as legal advice or


2/67

2

Please help yourself to foodand drinks

Please let us know if the roomtemperatureis too hot or

coldBathroomsare located pastthe reception desk on the right

Please turn OFFyour cell

phonesPlease complete and returnsureysat the end of theseminar


3/67

Trademark and CopyrightTrademark and CopyrightIssues on the WebIssues on the Web

Jeanne Hamburg


4/67

4

Why Important!Why Important!Top IP concerns:

!ybers"uatting

#nlawful copying of digital mediacontent

$everse engineering

Phishing

%ale of counterfeit goods online


5/67

5

Oerie"Oerie" Transactional Issues:

&icensing 'eb !ontent

'eb Publishing

'eb %ite (evelopment !ounseling Issues

'eb !ontent !learance)*air #se

!ontentious Issues (omain name recovery +cybers"uatting,

(-!

&itigation of online copyright infringement and licensingcases

!opyright and trademark issues arising from phishing/online counterfeiting/ key word purchases/ hyperlinking/

pop up ads/ framing


6/67

6

#icensing Web Content#icensing Web Content (istinguish whether content is being

licensed or 0ust a trademark

Is the content copyrightable1

'hat type of use is contemplated1+-ay not re"uire a license,


7/67

7

#icensing Web Content#icensing Web Content 'hat kind of license1

'hat type of grant1

$epresentations and 'arranties

!redit/ right of attribution/ right ofpublicity


8/67

8

Web PublishingWeb Publishing Publish and)or

purchase a book

that is printed andshipped to you orto download a

digital copy


9/67

9

Web PublishingWeb Publishing *orm of license/ same issues

Technological safeguards on

unauthori2ed copying

(oes third party site have terms ofuse prohibiting unauthori2ed use of

digital content purchased1


10/67

10

Web $ite %eelopmentWeb $ite %eelopment Hiring of third party +independent

contractor, to develop site

'ho will own content created andthe html code used to create it1


11/67

11

Web Content Clearance& FairWeb Content Clearance& Fair

'se'se3ou are a site owner or third party

owning content appearing on third party

site without permission !annot assume creative content

+graphic/ te4tual/ sound recordings/etc., are not protected by copyright

simply because available on web %ites claim to make material available

that is in 5the public domain6 +copyrighthas e4pired, but may not be


12/67

12

Web Content ClearanceWeb Content Clearance If license content from such a site/ look

for representations and warranties that

site owner has the rights &ook for terms of use that may restrictuse of the licensed content7 often aone time 5click through6

$ight of publicity)privacy issues ifperson is depicted in connection withpromoting a business


13/67

13

Web Content Clearance& FairWeb Content Clearance& Fair

'se'se 5*air use6 codi8ed at 9 #.%.!. 9;

llows the user of copyrighted material to do things

otherwise e4clusively the right of the copyright owner


14/67

14

Contentious IssuesContentious Issues

!ybers"uatting

(-!

&itigation of onlinecopyright)licensing cases

Trademark and copyright issuesuni"ue to the web


15/67

15

Cybers(uattingCybers(uattingTrademark/ or confusingly

similar mark/ is used in a web

site address

Prohibited by federal law

Aehicles for domain namerecovery


16/67

16

Federal Court Action forFederal Court Action forCybers(uattingCybers(uatting

$arely done unless there

is also another act oftrademark infringement

B4pensive

Co showing of bad faithre"uired


17/67

17

'%)P Proceedings'%)P Proceedings rbitration proceeding Cot necessary to own registered mark

!onfusingly similar

Co legitimate right to the domain name

$egistered in bad faith

I!CC

'IPD in %wit2erland and C* in -inneapolis !omplaint/ $eply/ and %urreply/ then a single

member or three member panel will decide.ll 8led electronically.


18/67

18

%*CA& $erice Proider%*CA& $erice Proider

#iability#iability (-! e@ective weapon for those whose

copyrights are infringed on the web

-akes the host of content/ who receivesnotice of the infringement from thecopyright owner or its counsel/ liable if itdoes not take down the content

*antastic remedy when infringerEs identityis not known or infringer is uncooperative


19/67

19

I$Ps Fre(uently ContactedI$Ps Fre(uently Contacted'nder %*CA'nder %*CA

pple +iTunes/ TBT$I% infringements, Foogle

Fadgets

ndroid ma2on
http://www.freestyle-developments.co.uk/img/projects/tetris.jpghttp://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.technologygear.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/google_android_logo.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.technologygear.net/android-application-developers-will-be-paid.html&usg=__rUjZGa7hpo9w7SV6hgNV_7WO8LI=&h=550&w=585&sz=84&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=lmnYcJ2Vwi4QoM:&tbnh=127&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgoogle%2Bandroid%2Blogo%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.blogsdna.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/itunes-logo.png&imgrefurl=http://www.blogsdna.com/2468/itunes-agent-lets-you-to-synchronize-any-portable-mp3-player-with-apple-itunes.htm&usg=__RjgJRdeBSnog0u3cPOX6y0d0pVI=&h=153&w=137&sz=31&hl=en&start=7&um=1&tbnid=Wk4qcsVLeSXNUM:&tbnh=96&tbnw=86&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dapple%2Bitunes%2Blogo%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1


20/67

20


21/67

21


22/67

22


23/67

23


24/67

24

%*CA& Anti+%*CA& Anti+

circumentioncircumention -akes it unlawful for someone to

hack through technology designed

to protect the unauthori2ede4ploitation of copyrightable content

pplies only if the content to which

unauthori2ed use is being blocked iscopyrightable +e.g. circumvention ofaccess to alphabetical directorylisting would not violate (-!,


25/67

25

#itigating Online Copyright#itigating Online CopyrightInfringement CasesInfringement Cases

!opyrightable e4pression +factual data

organi2ed logically not protected, ccess to copyrightable work +can often be

demonstrated with IP addresses,

!opying

!opying is presumed from substantialsimilarity


26/67

26

#itigating Online Copyright#itigating Online Copyright

Infringement CasesInfringement Cases -ust obtain registration before you sue7

e4pedited registration may be secured forthis purpose +9; days vs. several months,

Preliminary in0unction often ends the case

(eclaratory 0udgment is popular for the

alleged infringer -ust bring suit in federal court

Dften choice of 0urisdiction


27/67

27

#itigating Online Copyright#itigating Online Copyright

Infringement Cases&Infringement Casesicenses#icenses

5!lick through6 agreements or 5terms of

use6 can raise special issues Important to attend to the terms !onsent to 0urisdiction

$estricts use of content that is not copyrightable

dhesion: courts generally 8nd theseagreements binding

uthority to bind company

Hospital sued by provider of health care ratings


28/67

28

PhishingPhishing

!riminally fraudulent process of attempting toac"uire sensitive information such as usernames/passwords and credit card details bymas"uerading as a trustworthy entity in an

electronic communication !ommunications purporting to be from popular

social web sites/ auction sites/ online paymentprocessors or IT administrators are commonlyused to lure the unsuspecting public

Typically carried out by email or I-/ and it oftendirects users to enter details at a fake websitewhose look and feel are almost identical to thelegitimate one. Bven when using it may re"uiretremendous skill to detect that the website is fake

-aster!ard)#($P recovery and investigation


29/67

29

#egislation on Phishing#egislation on Phishing o legislation directly prohibits, but there may becopyright and trademark remedies aailable sincesite content and trademarks are copied

Credit Card Fraud Act

The Identity Theft and Assumption %eterrence Act Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act California-s Anti+Phishing #a"

!alifornia in =;;G became the 8rst state to enactlegislation designed speci8cally to deter phishing. %omevictims of phishing/ including those who provide Internet

access service to the public/ own a 'eb page/ or own atrademark/ may recover up to G;;/;;; for each provenviolation of the statute. Dther victims may recover up toG;;; for each violation of the statute. The statute alsoallows the states attorney general or a district attorneyin the state to bring an action to en0oin furtherviolations.


30/67

30

Online CounterfeitingOnline Counterfeiting Best Practices for Trademark O"ners Bducate the public so they are not deceived

on online searches/ marketplace and

shopping sites $e"uest that Payment %ervice Providers +such

as credit card and debit card companies/PayPal, terminate service and indemnify P%P

for wrongful termination $eport abuses of P%PEs trademark if

trademark owners are unable to make apurchase on a site bearing the P%PEs mark


31/67

31

Online CounterfeitingOnline Counterfeiting

!ontact the providers of Internet

shopping services under the (-! or&anham ct

CF! trade dress of coin holders +ebay form,

eBay, Inc.

0ahoo 1oogle

Ama2on


32/67

32

Is Copying of 3yperlinks aIs Copying of 3yperlinks a

Copyright Infringement!Copyright Infringement!

In the (e!%% case Universal v. Reimerdes/=K;; -aga2ine prohibited from posting

hyperlinks to (e!%% code because it found themaga2ine had linked for the purpose ofdisseminating a circumvention device

Intellectual Reserve v. Utah LighthouseMinistry:linking to unauthori2ed copies of a

te4t might be a contributory infringement ofthe works copyright Ticketmaster v. Tickets.comfound that

hyperlinks to ticket broker sites copied bytickets.com from the ticketmaster web sitewere not infringements of copyright


33/67

33

3yperlinking Best3yperlinking Best

PracticesPractices

In an email/ do not provide a 5live6

hyperlink Leneath a hyperlink in a site/

include a disclaimer that the site

owner is not aMliated with/ doesnot endorse or sponsor thetrademark ownerEs services


34/67

34

FramingFraming


35/67

35

FramingFraming

Perfect 45 . Ama2on.com&Foogles inNline links were not

infringements of the copyrightowners rights to copy and displayits work.


36/67

36

Pop 'p AdsPop 'p Ads


37/67

37

Pop 'p AdsPop 'p Ads

re a site ownerEs copyrights ortrademarks infringed when acompetitorEs pop up ad is displayedwhen a consumer access the site1

-ost courts hold no when:

Co 5use in commerce6 of the siteownerEs trademark in the ad itself

Cot a derivative work


38/67

38

6ey Word Purchases6ey Word Purchases

%earch engines such as Foogle sell

third party trademarks as 5keywords6 which will display thepurchaserEs web site on a searchby the user for the key

word)trademark


39/67

39



40/67

40


#% courts split on whether this isunlawful Is there likelihood of confusion/ trading

o@ on goodwill earned by thetrademark owner or is this 0ust like avirtual marketplace where di@erentbranded goods are displayed on virtual

5store shelves6 ne4t to each other1 Issue may be treated di@erently

abroad and in #%


41/67

41

Pay Per 7ie"8Pay Per ClickPay Per 7ie"8Pay Per Click

AdertisingAdertising 'hat is PPA)P!!1

Is the PPA or PP! ad of a third party+not the trademark owner, aninfringement if it does not use thetrademark in the ad but is displayed

on key word search of trademark1 In =;;K 3ahoo prohibited PPA or PP!

advertisers from bidding on thirdparty trademarks


42/67

42

Pay Per 7ie"8Pay PerPay Per 7ie"8Pay Per

Click AdertisingClick Adertising

Foogles d%ense program still

permits this7 OG percent ofFoogles revenue comes fromd%ense.

'hat are 5fraudulent clicks61


43/67

43


44/67

9uestions : Ans"ers9uestions : Ans"ers$ession Part 4$ession Part 4


45/67

$eminar Intermission$eminar Intermission


46/67

Business *ethod PatentsBusiness *ethod Patentsand the Bilski Caseand the Bilski Case

!hris !asieri


47/67

47

What is a Patent!What is a Patent! B4clusive rights granted to an

inventor for a limited period of time

in e4change for a public disclosure ofthe invention

$ights e4tend for =; years fromearliest 8ling date or 9 years fromdate of issuance depending when theapplication was 8led


48/67

48

What is the Origin ofWhat is the Origin of

'.$. Patent #a"!'.$. Patent #a"!

rticle I/ %ection / !lause of the

#nited %tates !onstitutionempowers the #.%. !ongress: 5To promote the Progress of %cience

and useful rts/ by securing for

limited Times to uthors andInventors the e4clusive $ight to theirrespective 'ritings and (iscoveries.6


49/67

49

What are the Types ofWhat are the Types of

'.$. Patents Aailable!'.$. Patents Aailable!

#tility Patents LilskiEs application

(esign Patents

Plant Patents


50/67

50

What Types of $ub;ectWhat Types of $ub;ect

*atter are Protectable by a*atter are Protectable by a'tility Patent!'tility Patent!

%ection 9;9 of #% Patent law sets out:

Whoever invents or discovers any new anduseful process, machine, manufacture, orcomposition of matter, or any new anduseful improvement thereof, may obtaina patent therefore, subject to theconditions and requirements of this title.


51/67

51

What is a BusinessWhat is a Business*ethod Patent!*ethod Patent!

Lusiness method patent is a type

of utility patent which is directed tonew methods of doing orconducting business


52/67

52

Famous BusinessFamous Business

*ethod Patent and*ethod Patent andIndustriesIndustries

ma2onEs oneNclick buying patent used

for purchasing on ma2on.com Lusiness method patents are useful to

the following industries: BNcommerce

Insurance Investment

Lanking

Ta4 !ompliance


53/67

53

What Are PatentWhat Are Patent

Claims!Claims! Patent claims de8ne/ in legal patent

terms/ the e4tent of the protection

sought in a utility application

sample patent claim may read:

Q-ethod for computing future lifee4pectancies/ said method comprisingsteps R/ 3/ S/ ...Q


54/67

54

What is the Bilski CaseWhat is the Bilski Case

and What is its 3istory!and What is its 3istory!

The LilskiEs patent application is a

pure business method patentapplication which has raised"uestions about what types of

inventions may be too abstract to"ualify for #% patent protection


55/67

55

In general, Bilski


56/67

56

#egal 3istory of Bilski#egal 3istory of Bilski #% Patent B4aminer re0ected all claims

#%PTDEs Loard of Patent ppeals andInterferences aMrmed the B4aminerEs decision

!ourt of ppeals for the *ederal !ircuit +!*!,

aMrmed the #%PTDEs re0ection of all claims

Lilski appealed to the #% %upreme !ourt forreview the !*!Es decision


57/67

57

Why is BilskiWhy is Bilski

Important!Important!

!*!Es decision was e4traordinarily

over broad s a result/ software/ pure businessmethods/ medical diagnosticmethods/ biotechnology methods/

medical device and eNcommercepatents may be unpatentable)invalidin view of the !*!Es decision


58/67

58

What Test "as Adopted byWhat Test "as Adopted by

the CAFC and What "as Theirthe CAFC and What "as Their%ecision!%ecision!

!*! applied a particular machine ortransformation +-DT, test: claimed process is surely patentNeligible

under 9;9 if: +9, it is tied to a particularmachine or apparatus/ or +=, it transforms aparticular article into a di@erent state or thing

In other words/ transformation)reduction ofan article to a di@erent state or thing is theclue to the patentability of a process claimthat does not include a particular machine


59/67

59

Additionally Issues That FurtherAdditionally Issues That Further

arro"ed the CAFC


60/67

60

What is the 3istoricalWhat is the 3istorical

$tandpoint Taken by the$tandpoint Taken by the$upreme Court!$upreme Court!

The %upreme !ourt typically allows

inventions that incorporate orapply abstract concepts such asmathematical formulas/ as long as

the invention/ as claimed/ has asuMciently practical impact in thereal world.


61/67

61

What Alternaties are ThereWhat Alternaties are There

to the *OT Test Adopted byto the *OT Test Adopted bythe CAFC!the CAFC!

In the 9OO/ the !*! utili2ed the

straightforward concrete/ useful/tangible test +the !#T test,

!*! e@ectively overruled the !#T

test with their Lilski decision


62/67

62

What are the IssuesWhat are the Issues

Before the $upremeBefore the $upremeCourt!Court!

Uey "uestion to be considered by the

%upreme !ourt: 'hether the -DT test should command

patentability outcomes possibly notintended by !ongress or re"uired under

the plain language of the statute


63/67

63

3o" *ay the $upreme3o" *ay the $upreme

Court %ecide!Court %ecide!The %upreme !ourt may:

Mrm the -DT test/ but rule that it is notthe de8nitive test for determining patenteligibility

$ule that business methods are inherentlyabstract ideas and are not patentable

Mrm the !*!Es decision/ making the -DTtest the brightNline test for establishingpatentability under >G #%! 9;9

3o" $hould3o" $hould


64/67

64

$oft"are8Business$oft"are8Business

*ethods be Protected*ethods be Protected'ntil the'ntil the

$upreme Court


65/67

65

Claim $atisfying the *OTClaim $atisfying the *OT

testtest method comprising:

Providing a computer network having aprogrammed computer and a ADIP device

Initiating a 8rst sales transaction betweentwo parties over the computer network viathe ADIP device

Identifying a producer with the programmedcomputer over the computer network

Initiating a second sales transactionbetween the producer and a party over thecomputer network via the ADIP device


66/67

66

Claim $atisfying the C'TClaim $atisfying the C'T

TestTest method comprising:

Initiating a 8rst sales transaction

between two parties Identifying a producer

Initiating a second sales transactionbetween the producer and a party


67/67

9uestions : Ans"ers9uestions : Ans"ers$ession Part =$ession Part =

Thank you for comingV

ip seminar ppt

Documents