Posts Tagged ‘patent trolls’

April 5 roundup

  • Lawsuit by pilot against landowner who shot down his drone is dismissed for lack of federal jurisdiction [Cyrus Farivar, ArsTechnica; earlier here and (criminal case) here]
  • Super-broad readings of Emoluments Clause intended to trip up President Trump might have unwelcome consequences for over 2 million military retirees and 2.8 million federal employees also affected by the Clause’s interpretation [Chuck Blanchard via Andy Grewal; earlier on Emoluments Clause]
  • “Appeals court throws out six Intellectual Ventures ‘do it on a computer’ patents” [Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica]
  • David Meyer-Lindenberg interviews Cato Institute chairman and legal scholar Bob Levy on topics that include Heller v. D.C., his taking up of law as a second career after business success, and Cato’s mission [Simple Justice]
  • Judicial deference to the administrative state: Evan Bernick reviews “Law’s Abnegation: From Law’s Empire to the Administrative State,” by Adrian Vermeule [Federalist Society Review]
  • An economist visits India’s great onion market [Alex Tabarrok]

March 8 roundup

November 16 roundup

Intellectual property roundup

  • “Copyright Trolls Now Threatening College Students With Loss of Scholarship, Deportation” [Timothy Geigner, TechDirt]
  • Use the phrase “Law Firm 2.0”? Better cease and desist [Carolyn Elefant, MyShingle]
  • “How A Supreme Court Case On Cheerleader Costumes and Copyright Could Impact Prosthetic Hands” [Mike Masnick, TechDirt]
  • Have you violated your competitor’s legal rights when you buy search engine advertising with its name as keyword? [Eric Goldman on Edible Arrangements case]
  • Trader Joe’s keeps battling the Canadian knockoff/reseller Pirate or Irate Joe’s [Lowering the Bar]
  • “Unified Patents files legal challenges against top three patent trolls of 2016” [Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica]

April 20 roundup

April 13 roundup

“Company wrests $100k payment from patent troll…”

“… but has no idea who paid.” Graphiq’s convincing victory against Lumen View shows how even with some recent pro-defendant shifts in the legal playing field, the economics of fighting off a patent troll are punishing. “Graphiq won its fight about as thoroughly and as quickly as possible — and forced the other side to pay up. Its total victory took advantage of both the Octane Fitness and Alice Corp. decisions, two Supreme Court decisions that tilted the playing field in favor of defendants. Yet even with those advantages, it still cost around a quarter-million dollars to win. Finally, the win shows the incredible lack of transparency in the murky world of patents. Even while Graphiq was paid $100,000, no one knows who paid the money.” [Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica]

Intellectual property roundup

  • “At least for the moment, Defendants have shaken off this lawsuit” — court dismisses handwritten challenge to originality of Taylor Swift’s “Shake It Off” [Lowering the Bar]
  • After nastygram from George Orwell estate, seller withdraws t-shirts bearing slogan “1984 is already here” [The Guardian] But see comment below from reader Gitarcarver (episode attributed more to CafePress over-reaction than to estate’s letter);
  • “Anne Frank’s Diary Now Has Co-Author, Extended Copyright” [Christopher Klein,]
  • “What the history of Eskimo Pies tells us about software patents today” [Charles Duan, Slate]
  • University of California, Santa Barbara, has put online a gold mine of 10,000 early recordings from the cylinder era, which ended in the 1920s [Hyperallergic] But could there be a copyright snag even on material this old? [Brian Frye, Prawfsblawg]
  • Judge says company must pay $684K for pursuing “exceptionally weak” patent case [Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica]
  • More: “That Irell & Manella would let itself get played by PETA for a stupid publicity stunt that serves no purpose other than to waste the court’s time…” [Mike Masnick, TechDirt; earlier on monkey-selfie case]