Patent Litigator from Skadden Moves to Attorneys Buchanan

NEW YORK, Feb. 26 LAWFUEL - US Law Firm News, Law Jobs -- Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC announced today the addition of patent and intellectual property litigator
Constance S. Huttner, who will chair the firm's Intellectual Property
Litigation Group. Prior to joining Buchanan, Huttner was a partner in the
Intellectual Property and Technology Group of Skadden, Arps, where she has focused on patent and technical litigation since establishing Skadden's patent litigation practice in 1990. Huttner is a shareholder in Buchanan's New York office.

The firm expects to add other patent litigation attorneys to Huttner's practice in the coming weeks.

Huttner joins the 120 attorneys and patent agents who already practice in Buchanan's IP and IP litigation groups.

Microsoft to book publishers: don’t trust Google with copyright

While Google says that it doesn't currently intend to place ads next to book search results, Google's broader business model is straightforward – attract as many users as possible to its site by providing what it considers to be 'free' content, then monetize that content by selling ads. I think Pat Schroeder put it best when she said Google has 'a hell of a business model – they're going to take everything you create, for free, and sell advertising around it.'"

He also attacked Google for scanning books without the permission of the copyright holder:

"Concocting a novel “fair use" theory, Google bestowed upon itself the unilateral right to make entire copies of copyrighted books not covered by these publisher agreements without first obtaining the copyright holder's permission."

He then pointed out that Microsoft's very own book search programs, Live Search Books and Live Search Academic, do seek the permission of the copyright holders before scanning books.

Intellectual Property Litigation Threatens a Growing Array of ...

According to research conducted by IncreMental Advantage, companies in a growing array of industries face potentially ruinous litigation relating to intellectual property. David Wanetick, Managing Director of IncreMental Advantage and Chief Intellectual Property Officer, said, Sources of Intellectual Property litigation include attacks by patent trolls, disputes over licensing issues, business methods patent violations, counterfeiting and disclosures of trade secrets.

Trends in Intellectual Property litigation include:
The number of intellectual property lawsuits soared almost three-fold from the beginning of the 1980s to the end of the 1990s. From 1984 to 1999, the median loss absorbed by companies faced with IP litigation was $2.9 million and the mean loss was $28.7 million in total losses.

Intellectual Property Verdicts Exceed $1.3 Billion in 2006

Finisar Corp. employs dozens of Ph.D.-level scientists to create technology for its high-speed data communication components and testing business, but one of the company's most lucrative inventions may be a patent outside of its core business that generated a court victory worth $117.3 million last year.

In June 2006, the Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Finisar won a $78.9 million jury verdict in a patent infringement case against broadcast satellite company The DirecTV Group Inc. of El Segundo, Calif. Although appeals are in the works, fines are racking up, including a judge's $25 million enhancement for willful infringement and $13.4 million for prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest and a compulsory license. Finisar Corp. v. DirecTV Group Inc., No. 05-00264 (E.D. Texas).

Amid a worldwide market expansion for technology products, the Finisar case is one of a burgeoning number of blockbuster verdicts in intellectual property cases.

Survey: Insiders the biggest threat to intellectual property

A new survey released today found that more than half of enterprises believe that the biggest threat to their sensitive information is through the action of malicious or negligent insiders—be they employees, outsourced workers or others working with trusted partners.

The results of the survey were published in an Enterprise Strategy Group brief titled "Intellectual Property Rules" as part of research conducted on behalf of Reconnex. In the report, analyst Eric Ogren noted that the insider threat is a risk not just to personally identifiable information, but also to the myriad of other types of intellectual property (IP) that businesses must protect daily.

"One of the surprises (we found) is how many different forms of IP of there are out there that companies are worried about protecting," Ogren told SCMagazine.com.

Intellectual Property Breaches Plague Thirty-Two Percent of ...

The findings of a new a survey focusing on the importance of protecting Intellectual Property (IP) was announced today. The research, conducted by the Enterprise Strategy Group and summarized in the brief titled "Intellectual Property Rules," found that one-third of the enterprises surveyed acknowledged loss of sensitive data in the last 12 months, while another 11 percent were unsure whether a breach occurred.

IP protection, which goes beyond just securing private records, has become such a priority that 90 percent of companies queried plan to deploy new technologies to secure their IP in the next 12 months. The epicenter of risk continues to be insiders who either act with malicious intent or are negligent.

"Intellectual Property Rules," which is based on a survey of personnel at enterprises that have from 1,000 to more than 20,000 employees worldwide, reveals some key findings:One-third of organizations surveyed acknowledged data losses in the last 12 months.Fifty-eight percent believe the biggest threat to their data is from the inside out, from malicious or negligent insiders.One-third of companies' sensitive data and IP exists in application databases where it can be centrally secured and managed.

No trust in intellectual property

While acknowledging that the world tends to view intellectual property as a way to exclude others from trampling on one's rights, Jason suggests an alternative reading:Do IPRs (intellectual property rights) provide a framework for collaboration? Does it in fact act as a catalyst for collaboration rather than an inhibitor? I am not thinking about collaboration in the free software, or open source context necessarily. I am being broader than that. In any situation where two firms, individuals etc. come together to collaborate, it is critical that there is a trust framework in place. That trust may be built upon the rule of law as much as on the personal relationship.This might be possible if we actually knew what IPRs others actually held. But we don't. This was abundantly clear in the Microsoft/Novell Linux pact.

Office Live Sues Microsoft

Office Live LLC., an online media company that gives free professional advice and runs a number of websites, including Officelive.net, has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft targeting its “Office Live" brand. The lawsuit aims to seek an injunction disallowing Microsoft from using the “Office Live" name. Office Live LLC has had a federal registration on the “Office Live" trademark since 2002, well before the launch of Microsoft's Office Live services, which only made their debut late last November. Office Live LLC also has a large number of services and websites centered on the Office Live brand, such as Lawofficelive.com, Autofficelive.com, and Realtorsofficelive.com. Following the release of Microsoft's Office Live services, Office Live LLC filed a lawsuit against Microsoft on December 29, 2006 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Senate Introduces NEMA-backed Intellectual Property Rights Act

Many people tell me that I am totally the wrong person to ever write about either "intellect" or "property," but two senators recently introduced new legislation on the subject that I applaud.
They are trying to put some teeth into the U.S. intellectual property rights, which seemingly get trudged upon continuously in the consumer electronics space.
Senators Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio) have introduced "The Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Act" in the U.S. Senate. Their bill seeks to ensure continued improvement in domestic interagency coordination, as well as international coordination among nations, committed to fair trade and shutting down counterfeiting and piracy networks.
The legislation will also require the executive branch to report to Congress about progress toward meeting national goals.

Asempra granted IT continuity patent

Asempra Technologies, a provider of instantaneous application and data availability solutions for Windows-based environments, has been granted a patent by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for technology advances that enable application-aware and file-based real-time continuous data protection. Asempra was awarded US Patent No. 7,096,392 for ‘a method and system for automated, no downtime, real-time, continuous data protection.’
Asempra's next-generation file aware continuous data protection technology provides guaranteed application and data availability for Windows environments.
Using ‘Virtual On-Demand Recovery’ technology, an application's data is available for use within minutes, even seconds, of recovery. The data recovered is guaranteed to be completely usable on the first recovery.

Vonage ordered to pay $58 million in patent case

Vonage Holdings Corp. must pay $58 million plus monthly royalties to Verizon Communications Inc. for infringing three patents on Internet-telephone service, a federal jury ruled.
Vonage shares fell to a record low.
Verizon asked for a court order banning Vonage's use of the technology following today's verdict in Alexandria, Virginia. The order would cripple Vonage by allowing it to handle only calls between the company's customers, Verizon lawyer Peter McCabe said.
A hearing was set for March 23.
"This is a big negative surprise" for Vonage, said Clayton Moran, an analyst with Stanford Group in Boca Raton, Florida, who rates the shares "hold" and doesn't own them. "It makes it more difficult for an already challenged business to get to profitability."
New York-based Verizon, the second-largest U.S.

The UK Intellectual Property Office is born

The UK Patent Office has announced that it plans to change its name to the UK Intellectual Property Office, in line with the recommendation of the Government's Gowers Review of Intellectual Property.
The new name is designed to reflect the Office's wider role, encompassing copyright and trademarks as well as patents.
'The [Gowers] report's main recommendations will help us to enforce intellectual property rights, and support British businesses both at home and abroad,' said Ron Marchant, the Office's chief executive.
The Gowers Review, set up by Chancellor Gordon Brown and chaired by former Financial Times journalist Andrew Gowers had considered whether to recommend the setting up of a separate copyright office, but instead concluded that all intellectual property issues should be overseen by a single organisation.

US Senators pressure Canada on copyright laws

Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Joseph Harper, has received a letter from US senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn, drawing attention to the issues of copyright protection efforts in Canada. The letter brings up the issue of people recording copies of motion pictures in theaters in Canada, which reportedly accounts for a large number of pirate movies available worldwide "We are writing to call your attention to the explosive growth of pirating of movies from theatres through the use of hand-recorders known as 'camcorders.' The theft and sale of newly-released movies has always been a serious threat to the motion picture industry. Now, the advancements of digital technology and improved camcorder capabilities have compounded the problem." the letter states. The letter goes on with details about laws that are currently enforced in the United States that criminalize the unauthorized recording of movies in theaters using camcorder equipment.

3M causes havoc with battery patent

BITS AND BOBS manufacturer, 3M, has suddenly noticed it holds patents on lithium ion batteries and has filed a lawsuit against multiple leading laptop PC suppliers in the USA. Nokia could easily be the next target.
Lithium ion batteries are used by many different types of portable electronic/electrical devices including MP3 players and camcorders as well as notebook PCs. But mobile phones sell in their billions and Nokia is by far the biggest supplier. The company refused to comment on the issue, however.
The move is curious because the patented technology covered in the suit relates to cathode materials developed by 3M The cathode being the postive electrode in this kind of battery.
More puzzlingly still, the lawsuit alleges 'willful infringement' by the parties involved which include CDW, Hitachi, Lenovo, Matsushita (Panasonic), Sony and others.