Intellectual Property News
More...
Intellectual Property Articles
Internet Business Method Patents
Since 1998, an increasing number of patents have been issued to software and Internet companies that have devised novel ways of doing business -- for example, new online ordering processes or a unique Internet advertising scheme. These patents, which usually combine software with business methodology, are commonly referred to as business method patents or Internet patents.
More...
What type of creative work does copyright protect?
Copyright protects works such as poetry, movies, CD-ROMs, video games, videos, plays, DVDs, paintings, sheet music, recorded music performances, novels, software code, sculptures, photographs, choreography, and architectural designs.
More...
|
|
Intellectual Property Case Summaries
[10/03] Impax Labs., Inc. v. Aventis Pharm. Inc. In a suit seeking a declaratory judgment that plaintiff did not infringe defendant's patent for a drug to treat ALS, judgment that an earlier patent did not anticipate the claims of the patent at issue is affirmed where the district court applied the proper enablement standard and correctly determined that the earlier patent was not an enabling prior art reference.
[10/02] The Johns Hopkins Univ. v. Datascope Corp. In a suit over three patents describing methods for mechanically fragmenting blood clots, judgment of infringement and contributory infringement is reversed and remanded where the jury's verdict of infringement was not supported by substantial evidence.
[09/29] Praxair, Inc. v. ATMI, Inc. In a suit alleging infringement of three patents describing pressurized storage containers for fluids used in making semiconductors, judgment of infringement of some claims, unenforceability of two of the patents for inequitable conduct, and invalidity for indefiniteness of other claims is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) one patent was unenforceable for inequitable conduct, but another was not as no intent finding was made as to the withholding of prior art; 2) construction of a claim term was not indefinite; and 3) the court lacked jurisdiction over defendant's cross-appeal.
More...
|