Category Archives: Intellectual Property

Copyright Protection Denied Due to the Inseparability of an Item’s Artistic Features and its Usefulness

By Contributor Attorney Ashley T. Ellerbe, JD, cum laude, Phi Delta Phi Legal Honor Society, Florida Coastal School of Law, former legal intern for CSX Corporation.

For some copyright holders, the ruling of the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Inhale, Inc. v. Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc. may be a disappointing one. Although Inhale, Inc. had a registered copyright for the shape of a hookah water container, that registration would not grant them the protection that they anticipated. 

Inhale sued Starbuzz claiming copyright infringement due to Starbuzz’s use of hookah water containers that were identical in shape to Inhale’s container.  The district court held that although Inhale has a registered copyright, its copyright registration is invalid because the hookah water container is not copyrightable.  The shape of the container is only copyrightable if the sculptural features are capable of existing independently of the utilitarian aspects of the container.  Moreover, the distinctive shape of an item is not a factor in determining whether the artistic features can be separate from its usefulness.  The district court concluded and the court of appeals affirmed that the shape of the container accomplishes its function which is to hold the contents within its shape, thus making the hookah water container uncopyrightable.  Furthermore, to keep a tight seal on Pandora’s Box of potentially similar frivolous claims against innocent defendants, the court of appeals affirmed the lower court’s award of attorneys’ fees and the court of appeals awarded attorneys’ fees that incurred in the defense of the appeal.

 

Infringement for $345 Million in Damages and Royalties Even After Adaptation of Computer Pricing System.

On May 1, 2013, the US Federal Circuit Court of Appeals held that even when a company adapted a software pricing system that prevented users from saving data into certain fields, the jury finding of a direct infringement was upheld. In Versata Software, Inc. v SAP AM., Inc. the plaintiff had a pending patent on a pricing system, and sold it as an addition to companies like the defendant software maker SAP. While Versata’s patent application was pending, SAP released a new version of its software that infringed the plaintiff’s product.  The Defendant thereafter modified its own product to make it less available to users. But the jury concluded that the products still infringed and awarded plaintiff $260 million in lost profits and royalties of $85 million.

View the case via Justina US Law:  http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/12-1029/12-1029-2013-05-01.html?utm_source=Justia+Law&utm_campaign=f6371ef6b9-summary_newsletters_practice&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_92aabbfa32-f6371ef6b9-406004917

Publicly Traded Companies Can Use Social Media to Disclose Material, Non Public Information

By contributor Brittney Trigg: Florida Coastal School of Law JD and business law certificate candidate 2014, law clerk for Law Offices of Xavier Saunders, P.A.

Publicly traded companies can now use social media as a way to disclose material, non public information, and be in compliance with Regulation FD.  The company must give investors proper notice of the site that the company will use to disclose that information. Continue reading

Antenna Company Threatens Traditional Broadcast Rights and Revenue.

By Contributor Roger M. Groves, Professor of Law and Director of the Business Law Program at Florida Coastal School of Law.

A small startup company, Aereo, provides a method of streaming broadcast TV through a browser. It provides a DVR in a cloud storage system by micro-version TV antennas, thereby rebroadcasting programming content found in the public airwaves.  Aero has recently been sued by a contingent of broadcasters, including Fox, Univision, and PBS and a majority of the media outlets in New York City. The claim is that Aereo infringes of their copyrights. The broadcasters seek an injunction to immediately stop Aereo’s activities and attendant monetary damages.

The economic crux of the dispute is that Aereo provides this service for only $12 a month. This allegedly threatens the substantial license fees and advertising revenue the broadcasters generate from cable companies.  To view the complaint in this case see the link: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2012cv01540/392820/1/

 

Twitter Granted Patent for Tweets

On March 19, 2013, a patent was issued to individuals Twitter. The patent is awarded for “tweeting” which is technically titled under the patent as a “Device Independent Message Distribution Platform.”

A provisional patent application was filed in July, 2007, so the question of whether the devise was sufficiently novel, useful, and non-obvious is determined as of that time. According the Patent Office, Twitter had a patentable method of distributing messages independently of the sending or receiving devices and “beneficially allows for device independent point to multipoint communication.” For more detailed information see U.S. Patent No. 8,401,009.

- Roger M. Groves, director of business law certificate program, Florida Coastal School of Law