On Wednesday, a group representing internet radio broadcasters and SoundExchange, the organization that collects royalties from such broadcasts, announced an agreement to set the fee schedule for online music broadcasting. The agreement marks the resolution of years of wrangling and negotiations.
A 2007 ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board had determined the previous royalty rates. Broadcasters widely bemoaned that they had drawn the short straw in that rate determination and that the schedule rendered their continued existence completely unviable. In June 2007 the internet radio community even organized to observe an Internet Radio Day of Silence, to draw attention to the seriousness of their plight.
The new agreement. entitled Webcaster Settlement Act of 2009, appears to exorcise the sense of inevitable doom felt by broadcasters under the previous scheme. The agreement is aimed at "Pure Play" broadcasters, or broadcasters whose primary operations involve the streaming of audio online. As such it does not apply to terrestrial radio stations that offer streaming online versions of their broadcasts.
[via WSJ]
Friday, July 10, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
President Obama picks David Kappos to head PTO
Last week, President Obama announced the nomination of David Kappos to serve as the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. If confirmed, Kappos will assume the reins from John J. Doll, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property, who has served as acting director since the resignation of Bush appointee, Jon Dudas, in January.
Kappos has spent his entire legal career managing the IP assets of IBM, for whom he had previously worked as an engineer. In his new position Kappos will immediately confront the challenges of slimming the Office's application backlog, monitoring the movement of the Patent Reform Act through the legislative process and helping the Office defend (or ultimately reform) its examining procedures in light of Supreme Court scutiny.
Kappos has spent his entire legal career managing the IP assets of IBM, for whom he had previously worked as an engineer. In his new position Kappos will immediately confront the challenges of slimming the Office's application backlog, monitoring the movement of the Patent Reform Act through the legislative process and helping the Office defend (or ultimately reform) its examining procedures in light of Supreme Court scutiny.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Supreme Court to review Bilski
Last Monday, the Supreme Court announced that it has granted certiorari to review the Federal Circuit's ruling in In re Bilski (No. 08-964), which addressed the tricky but crucial issue of what kind of inventions are eligible to receive patent protection. Bilski, which examined a method patent for hedging risk related to commodity transactions, endorsed the Federal Circuit's machine-or-transformation test and consequently affirmed the PTO's rejection of the appellant's patent application. The machine-or-transformation test holds a patent valid if it is either tied to a particular machine or if the method transforms a physical article. Although the rule as adopted by the Federal Circuit appears to preordain the invalidity of any business method patents, inter alia, the court meticulously avoided any sweeping pronouncements on the patentability of broad categories. In fact, the Bilski case specificaly preserved the ambiguity of previous Supreme Court cases, which suggested that the machine-or-transformation test is not the definitive litmus test of patentability for processes. While patent at issue in Bilski describes a business method, the outcome of the case is likely to have equally important reprecussions for computer software, whose patent status has long been the subject of controversy and confusion.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
President Obama nominates Sonia Sotomayor for vacant Supreme Court seat
Yesterday, President Obama nominated Second Circuit Court of Appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to succeed Justice David Souter, when he retires after the end of the current Supreme Court term in June.
It is unclear how this will affect the Court's intellectual property jurisprudence. Despite presiding over courts (the Southern District of New York and Second Circuit) notorious for their IP-heavy dockets and indeed having practiced as an intellectual property litigator before rising to the bench (more tenuously, her ex-husband practices patent law), Sotomayor's judicial record on intellectual property issues is surprisingly scarce. The most notable IP opinion she drafted as a lower court judge was Tasini v. New York Times, which she decided while still a district court judge. In this case, Sotomayor held that print publications, like the Times, were not required to renegotiate licenses with its authors in order to republish their articles via new digital media like electronic databases. Sotomayor's holding was eventually reversed by the Supreme Court.
Judge Sotomayor's reticence on intellectual property matters lies in stark contrast to two of her would-be colleagues in the Court's "liberal" wing. While still a professor at Harvard Law School, Justice Stephen Breyer drafted "The Uneasy Case for Copyright", an influential law review article that criticizes copyright law as overly protective of author's rights to the point of stifling creativity. At the other end of the policy spectrum, Justice Ginsburg (whose daughter Jane is herself a celebrated IP scholar) is often perceived as a reliable ally for strong, broadly defined IP rights.
It is unclear how this will affect the Court's intellectual property jurisprudence. Despite presiding over courts (the Southern District of New York and Second Circuit) notorious for their IP-heavy dockets and indeed having practiced as an intellectual property litigator before rising to the bench (more tenuously, her ex-husband practices patent law), Sotomayor's judicial record on intellectual property issues is surprisingly scarce. The most notable IP opinion she drafted as a lower court judge was Tasini v. New York Times, which she decided while still a district court judge. In this case, Sotomayor held that print publications, like the Times, were not required to renegotiate licenses with its authors in order to republish their articles via new digital media like electronic databases. Sotomayor's holding was eventually reversed by the Supreme Court.
Judge Sotomayor's reticence on intellectual property matters lies in stark contrast to two of her would-be colleagues in the Court's "liberal" wing. While still a professor at Harvard Law School, Justice Stephen Breyer drafted "The Uneasy Case for Copyright", an influential law review article that criticizes copyright law as overly protective of author's rights to the point of stifling creativity. At the other end of the policy spectrum, Justice Ginsburg (whose daughter Jane is herself a celebrated IP scholar) is often perceived as a reliable ally for strong, broadly defined IP rights.
Friday, May 22, 2009
German Patent Office Rejects Killer Chip
The German Patent and Trademark Office has rejected a Saudi inventor's application to patent a device uncomfortably reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984 or Bladerunner.
The application described a tiny chip that could be inserted beneath a person's skin. The chip would contain GPS technology that could ascertain and relay information about its wearer's location to authorities. If the authories were convinced that the wearer is engaged in threatening activities, they could trigger the chip to release a fatal dose of cyanide into the weaer's body. The inventor proposed that the device could be useful for tracking terrorists, criminals, illegal immigrants and foreigners suspected of overstaying their visas. (Not being an expert on immigration law, the author finds it a tad harsh that a person suspected of violating his visa should be summarily killed.)
Registration of the patent was denied on the basis of §1(2) of the German Patent Act, which prohibits the registration of "inventions, the publication or exploitation of which woould be contrary to public policy or morality."
[via Fox News]
The application described a tiny chip that could be inserted beneath a person's skin. The chip would contain GPS technology that could ascertain and relay information about its wearer's location to authorities. If the authories were convinced that the wearer is engaged in threatening activities, they could trigger the chip to release a fatal dose of cyanide into the weaer's body. The inventor proposed that the device could be useful for tracking terrorists, criminals, illegal immigrants and foreigners suspected of overstaying their visas. (Not being an expert on immigration law, the author finds it a tad harsh that a person suspected of violating his visa should be summarily killed.)
Registration of the patent was denied on the basis of §1(2) of the German Patent Act, which prohibits the registration of "inventions, the publication or exploitation of which woould be contrary to public policy or morality."
[via Fox News]
Welcome!
Welcome to the Cohn Patent Blog. My staff and I will use this space to discuss interesting developments in intellectual property law, reflect on what we have accomplished in the office and keep in touch with clients and the public. Please check back often or add us to your blog feed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
