Top Intellectual Property Law Issues, 2006, From Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks
7 January 2006 Patent system reform.
"Everyone is complaining about the patent system, a growing drag on the US
economy and companies facing global competition. From inventors whose
patents are taking years to be examined by the Patent Office to companies
that face one lawsuit after another from so-called patent trolls, no one is
happy with the way the system is working," says patent lawyer James Morris
with Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. in Boston.
"Given that intellectual property has become a cornerstone of the American
economy, strengthening protection of companies' intellectual property is a
priority. There will definitely be some changes to the patent system in
2006."
Counterfeiting explodes; victims fight back with help of new laws.
Counterfeit goods now bring in an estimated $350 billion a year, about 5 to
7 percent of all worldwide trade, and knock-offs of American products top
the charts.
"You can use the law to fight back and make sure that you control the
market you've developed and the brand image you've created," says trademark
expert Doug Wolf.
Meanwhile, Congress is providing more weapons. The just-enacted "Stop
Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act" makes it illegal to traffic in
counterfeit labels and extends the types of property subject to forfeiture.
The proposed "Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2005" would greatly
expand the criminal sanctions of the Copyright Act. Despite vigorously
enforcing its property rights, Wolf Greenfield client Burton Snowboards has
discovered many fake Burton products here and abroad. "Fighting piracy is
a never-ending battle for every company with a famous brand," Wolf says.
Highlighted Links
Wolf Greenfield
Supreme Court to consider unusual number of patent cases involving eBay and
others.
In December the court agreed to hear "eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC." In
this case, involving a business-method patent, the top patent court, the US
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ruled that a patent owner that
has proved infringement get an injunction even if patent owner isn't using
the patent. "If you can put someone out of business, that gives you a lot
of bargaining power," say Wolf Greenfield litigator Jim Foster. "This is a
very big issue impacting law and litigation."
"Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc." focuses on the
conflict between patent and antitrust law. Under current law and the
Federal Circuit's recent decision, a patent holder is presumed to have
market power, and if there's an antitrust complaint, must prove it doesn't
have market power. This is a complex case where the patent holder
allegedly required customers to buy both unpatented and patented products,
Foster says. Arguments were heard in November, with decision expected in
the first half of 2006. "I think the Supreme Court will reverse the
Federal Circuit," he says.
CREATE Act: far-reaching implications for biotech collaborations between
companies and universities.
The Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement Act of 2004 affects
the growing number of collaborations between universities and companies,
says Helen C. Lockhart, head of Wolf Greenfield's biotech practice.
Universities have to be aware of the risks. A corporate collaborator could
make seemingly obvious contributions pursuant to a joint research agreement
and wind up with a blocking patent that could paralyze the university in
the event of a 'divorce.'
Wolf Greenfield (www.wolfgreenfield.com), Boston, is one of New England's
largest and oldest intellectual property law firms, serving companies that
make everything from snowboards to biotech drugs to electronics to
water-purification systems -- plus universities and research centers.
Contact:
Henry Stimpson
Stimpson Communications
508-647-0705
Email Contact
SOURCE: Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks
Source: marketwire
All trademarks and copyrighted information contained herein are the property of their respective owners.
Related Articles
|
