Posts in Podcasts

In a recent legal development that has captured the attention of the intellectual property world, a three-judge appellate panel has explored the intricacies of the willful blindness doctrine within the context of contributory trademark infringement. This thought-provoking case involves the legal dispute between online marketplace giant Redbubble and YYGM, trading as Brandy Melville. The legal discussion at hand offers valuable insights into the evolving landscape of online trademark infringement liability.

Non-diluting capital can be an essential source of funding when trying to get your innovation off the ground. Investor money comes with the loss of equity and/or control. Family and friends’ money may come with the risk of strained relationships. In comparison, essentially free money by way of government grants can seem like an obvious choice, right? And it is for many. The Small Business Technology Transfer (or STTR) and Small Business Innovation Research (or SBIR) grants are the largest source of early-stage capital for life science startups in the United States, combining to provide over $2 billion annually in support from federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH). But like money from investors, friends, and family, these grants do still come with some serious strings attached and potential ramifications you need to be aware of.

Copyrights and trademarks, in particular, have seen a lot of limelight this year involving some of the biggest brands and pop culture icons. At the same time, major IP rights questions are erupting around the use of generative AI systems like ChatGPT. In this month’s episode of Patently Strategic, we take a fast-paced tour through some of the highest-profile copyright and trademark disputes – both recently settled and freshly on the horizon – involving the likes of Jack Daniels, Mickey Mouse, Andy Warhol, Jason Voorhees, Winnie-the-Pooh, Lizzo, and WallStreetBets. Fortunately for us, sometimes life can be more entertaining than art. In addition to covering the IP fundamentals necessary to help get you booted up, we’re going to use big brand IP current events and Supreme Court cases as a vehicle to gain a deeper understanding of copyrights and trademarks and some of the sharpest corners you should be aware of when managing your own brand protection.

The technological improvement test is used by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to determine the issue of subject matter eligibility. Of all the tests for a showing of something more or practical application – machine transformation, machine implementation, data transformation – technological improvement is probably the most popular and oft-used by applicants because it has the clearest standards. As you probably already know, the technological improvement test used by the USPTO looks for a technological problem for which there is a technological solution and the claims recite a technological improvement therefor.

When Judge Pauline Newman helped create the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982 to have exclusive jurisdiction over patent cases, no one could have guessed the drama that would follow almost 40 years later.. The drama, in her view, is now forcing her to choose preserving the entire structure of American government over the court she loves. In April, Gene Quinn broke the news on IPWatchdog about a complaint filed by Chief Judge Kimberly Moore of the Federal Circuit against Newman for being unable to effectively discharge the duties of her office. Days later, Newman showed up and spoke at Fordham Law School’s annual IP conference in New York, speaking with an eloquence that completely undermined the foundation of that complaint.

Will Twitter’s meager patent portfolio doom Musk’s hopes of “strictly enforcing” Twitter’s IP rights? Eli is joined by return guest Kroub on this special episode to discuss how an unprecedented IP dispute between two of the world’s richest men might play out. In response to Meta successfully launching Threads, Musk’s go to lawyer Alex Spiro sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg expressing “serious concerns that Meta…has engaged in systematic, willful, and unlawful misappropriation of Twitter’s trade secrets and other intellectual property” and intention to “strictly enforce its intellectual property rights.”  Although the letter focuses on trade secrets, Spiro’s colleagues are likely busy mining Twitter’s patent portfolio.

In the latest episode of The SEP Couch, Tim Pohlmann interviews Eli Mazour, a partner with Harrity & Harrity LLP and host of the Clause 8 podcast. With experience working alongside Qualcomm and other innovation leaders, Mazour navigates the difficulties inherent in standard essential patents and explores how companies on either side strive for change. He underscores the need to comprehend technology, beyond merely perusing patents and standards.

In this episode, IP Goes Pop! is joined by an all-star lineup to discuss the dangers of counterfeit goods and the importance of intellectual property rights. Hosts Michael Snyder and Joseph Gushue are joined by: Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Kathi Vidal; Executive Director of the National Crime Prevention Council, Paul DelPonte; and the legendary McGruff the Crime Dog®. Our guests share their insights on the impact of counterfeits on society, the economy, and individual safety.

“Show me the money.” “Who you gonna call?” “Go Ahead. Make my day.” While catchphrases like these often hold immense value and creators of these phrases may seek to prevent others from using them under any circumstances, the protectability of short phrases is not always straightforward.

Why do patents exist in the first place? What function do they serve in society? And what is their historic origin story? In this month’s episode, with the help of Professor Adam Mossoff, we zoom way out, turn the time dial back a bit, and focus on the genesis of patents and the critical role they’ve played as the primary driver in society for encouraging innovation, promoting public disclosure, facilitating technology transfer, and stimulating economic growth.

Will Artificial Intelligence (AI) replace patent attorneys? “No, but someone using AI will,” says Shawn Lillemo on this episode of the Clause 8 podcast. The public launch of ChatGPT has spurred endless conversations like this about the role that technology will play in the legal profession. Eli Mazour’s colleague, Shawn, has spent more than five years thinking about the topic in his unique role as head of software development at their patent preparation and prosecution firm, Harrity, which had less than two dozen attorneys when Shawn joined.

In this episode of The SEP Couch, Otto Licks and Roberto Rodrigues from Licks Attorneys share their experience with SEP litigation in Brazil, which is becoming a preferred venue for worldwide patent disputes because of its efficient decision-making, bifurcated system, and high-quality patents. Brazilian courts assume patents to be valid, and the number of SEPs that have been invalidated during litigation is very low. Patent holders must provide evidence of licensing negotiations before preliminary injunctions can be issued, but Brazilian courts do not determine a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) rate. Brazil has never been involved in anti-suit injunctions in the past, and the courts consider the licensing negotiation track record in their decision making.

Patents have many audiences, and folks from our industry tend to focus most on the patent office and the courts. But for inventors, they often care more, initially anyway, about investors. And investors are going to look at patents in very different ways than an examiner or a judge would. That’s the perspective we’re hoping to offer in this episode of Patently Strategic. What do investors want to see in patents? What do patents tell a potential investor about a founder? And what do investors wish inventors knew before coming to them?