federal court

The Ninth Circuit Court

Rules federal copyright

trumps publicity

image
By Marine 69-71 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57685344

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that state law right-of-publicity claims are pre-empted by the federal Copyright Act “when a likeness has been captured in a copyrighted artistic visual work and the work itself is being distributed for personal use.”

The case of Maloney v. T3 Media, Inc .was brought by former student athletes Patrick Maloney and Tim Judge. Maloney and Judge played for the Catholic University men’s basketball team between 1997 and 2001.

In their first year on the team, the men made it to the Division III national championship game, which their team won in an upset.

Read the full article →

Paul McCartney Fights to Get Beatles Copyrights Back

by Adam Philipp on February 6, 2017

Paul McCartney seeks

Return of Beatles song rights —

long and winding road

image
By Eddie Janssens – Wikiportrait, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22094600

Paul McCartney is seeking to reclaim ownership of the copyrights to Beatles song.

The case is based on a little-known aspect of US Copyright law.

Under 17 U.S. Code § 304, there’s a “Termination of Transfers and Licenses” provision that reads:

Read the full article →

USPTO

Updates subject matter guide,

Helps examiners

By Tim Evanson from Washington, D.C., USA, United States of America - USPTO-Alexandria-2011-03-12_a, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37051960 By Tim Evanson from Washington, D.C., USA, United States of America – USPTO-Alexandria-2011-03-12_a, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37051960

 

The United States Patent Office (USPTO) recently issued its latest update to its guidelines on patent subject matter eligibility.

These guidelines help patent examiners decide whether or not the claims of a patent applicable describe an invention that’s actually eligible for a patent.

Read the full article →

Over at the 271 Patent Blog, Peter Zura summarizes Every Penny Counts, Inc. v. Bank of America Corp., 2-07-cv-00042 (M.D. Fla. May 27, 2009, Order) (Magnuson, J.). In this case, the district court holds that, under Bilski, the claimed system is not patentable subject matter under § 101.

In Every Penny Counts, the district court uses Bilski as Judge Newman predicted in her Bilski dissent: “each trial court… will have a blank slate on which to uphold or invalidate claims based on whether there are sufficient ‘meaningful limits'” imposed on the claim by the use of a particular machine.

Read the full article →