Groupon Inc. has filed a trade secret lawsuit against two former sales managers, accusing them of taking confidential trade secrets with them when they left to join a competing venture run by Google Inc. Lawsuits like these are extremely common in the technology industry, where the competition to roll out innovative products is intense.
According to the complaint filed in an Illinois court, Michael Nolan, who worked for Groupon for two years, and Brian Hanna, who joined the company in January, each left last month to join Google Offers. Google, based in Mountain View, California, isn’t named in the suit.
The hiring of Hanna and Nolan by Google breaches their employment agreement with Groupon, which bars them from working with a direct competitor for 24 months after leaving the company, Groupon said.
“In their new positions with Google Offers and/or Google, Hanna and Nolan will provide the same or similar services as they provided at Groupon,” requiring them “to employ confidential and proprietary information that they learned while employed at Groupon,” according to the complaint.
Groupon seeks a court order to prevent the former employees from disclosing confidential information to Google, which would continue to “irreparably” harm it.
As this case highlights, employment and contractual confidentiality agreements are critical tools in guarding valuable trade secrets. Without these agreements in place, Groupon would be unable to provide the necessary documentation under the trade secret laws to assert that its sensitive information has been stolen.
How To Protect Your Company
To ensure your company is protected, anyone granted access to proprietary company trade secret information should be required to sign a confidentiality agreement prior to any such disclosure, whether it be an employee, consultant, partner, distributer, or any other third party. Of course, this is only one way to protect your proprietary information. To create a comprehensive strategy, it is best to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney.
Source: Business Week
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Contact our knowledgeable intellectual property attorneys today TOLL FREE at 1-855-UR IDEAS (1-855-874-3327) to find out how we can provide a powerful defense of your unique ideas.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Did Groupon’s Former Sales Managers Take Trade Secrets to Google?
Update: Twitter Finally Lands Coveted “Tweet” Trademark
A few weeks ago, James Eliason, CEO of Twittad, indicated that Twitter’s battle for ownership of the “tweet” trademark may finally have come to an end. According to Eliason, Twitter would drop a trademark lawsuit it filed against his company that sought to nullify Twittad’s registered trademark of the word “tweet.” In return, Twittad would transfer its registered trademark of “tweet” to Twitter, he said.
Eliason declined to say whether Twitter paid Twittad, citing a confidentiality agreement between the companies. But it’s probably a good bet that money exchanged hands, given the value of the mark to Twitter.
“We’ve arrived at a resolution with Twittad that recognizes consistent use of Tweet while supporting the continued success of Twitter ecosystem partners like Twittad,” Twitter spokeswoman Lynn Fox said in a statement.
Eliason said Twitter would restore Twittad’s account on Twitter so that it can resume business. Twittad helps a network of 27,000 other Twitter users to get paid to tweet advertisements on Twitter. Eliason also indicated Twittad would continue to use its original tagline: “Let your ad meet tweets.”
As we discussed in a previous blog post last month, the USPTO had suspended Twitter’s trademark applications because other companies, including Twittad, had applied to trademark various versions of the mark before Twitter did. As a result, Twitter filed the California trademark lawsuit against Twittad, arguing that “tweet” was already “famous” as a Twitter term before rivals filed trademark applications, making Twitter the mark’s rightful owner.
“The moral of the story is to make sure you trademark and patent-protect everything,” said Eliason, 32 years old.
We could not have said it better…
Source: Wall Street Journal
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Contact our knowledgeable intellectual property attorneys today TOLL FREE at 1-855-UR IDEAS (1-855-874-3327) to find out how we can provide a powerful defense of your unique ideas.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Muhammad Ali Hoping for a Knockout in Trademark Infringement Case
Muhammad Ali has entered the legal ring, accusing digital bookseller Kobo Inc. of using the former heavyweight champion’s “Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee” slogan in an advertisement without permission. The trademark lawsuit seeks injunctive relief against Kobo, requests that it recall and destroy all allegedly infringing advertisements, and seeks attorneys’ fees and damages.
The complaint alleges that Kobo improperly used the slogan in a New York Times advertisement for its eReader, an electronic book-reading device. The slogan and Ali’s name was the most prominent wording on the advertising page, and underneath the expression, according to the complaint, the ad read: “Lightweight. Powerful. Intuitive. The new Kobo eReader Touch Edition. Just in time for Father’s Day.”
Muhammad Ali Enterprises LLC, a California company that owns the intellectual property rights of the boxer, alleges that Kobo’s use of the trademarked expression falsely implies to consumers that the product is endorsed personally by Ali or is affiliated with him in some way. As detailed in its trademark-infringement complaint, the boxer’s company claims that the advertisement makes “commercial use of valuable property without authorization or compensation.”
According to the complaint, the advertisement also included press statements about the eReader that the complaint alleges are a “reinforcement of the persona of Muhammad Ali.” For instance, one blurb, from Computerworld magazine, describes the device as a “real contender.”
Finally, the suit also contends that Kobo’s conduct is likely to diminish, “if not destroy, the opportunity to license Muhammad Ali’s identity to the manufacturer of competitive devices and eliminates the ability for Muhammad Ali Enterprises LLC to offer any such manufacturer an exclusive license, which typically is of greater economic value.”
To find out if the lawsuit results in a knockout, please check back to our blog for updates.
Source: Bloomberg
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Contact our knowledgeable intellectual property attorneys today TOLL FREE at 1-855-UR IDEAS (1-855-874-3327) to find out how we can provide a powerful defense of your unique ideas.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Green Technology Pilot Program Marks 500th Patent
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently announced that it has issued the 500th patent through its Green Technology Pilot Program. Under the patent program, applications involving reduced greenhouse gas emissions, energy conservation, and environmental quality are eligible for accelerated review at no cost to the inventor.
The 500th patent was issued for a “Wind Turbine Rotor Blade with Aerodynamic Winglet” to General Electric Company (patent no. 8,029,241). This is the 116th patent General Electric has secured through the USPTO’s Green Technology Pilot Program.
Overall, program statistics show that the Green Tech Pilot has been a success. Inventors participating in the program have obtained patents much more quickly as compared to the standard examination process. Currently, the average time between granting of a green technology petition and first office action on the merits is just 68 days. In many instances, applicants have had their Green Technology inventions patented in less than one year from the application filing date.
In a related press release, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos stated, “USPTO is proud to play a role in accelerating socially conscious technologies in emerging fields like alternative fuels, clean energy, and green technology. By advancing a commitment to building a more sustainable energy future the agency is able to spur additional innovation and promote green collar jobs that provide our world with alternatives to harmful energy practices.”
For inventors and companies interested in the program, the USPTO extended the deadline for filing petitions to December 31, 2011.
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Contact our knowledgeable intellectual property attorneys today TOLL FREE at 1-855-UR IDEAS (1-855-874-3327) to find out how we can provide a powerful defense of your unique ideas.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
What Do Jimi Hendrix and Copyright Law Have in Common?
The late Jimi Hendrix took center stage at the Supreme Court last month as the country’s high court heard arguments regarding whether Congress acted constitutionally when it restored copyright protection to foreign works that had once been in the public domain.
The 1994 law was part of an effort to implement the Berne Convention, a treaty that gives U.S. works reciprocal protection overseas. In the words of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Congress essentially decided that “Shostakovich should be treated just like Copland,” referring to the 20th century Russian composer and his American contemporary.
As detailed by the Wall Street Journal, the lawsuit before the Supreme Court was filed by orchestra conductors, teachers, and film archivists who argue that they relied on the free availability of such works. They have challenged the law both for exceeding Congress’s power to grant copyrights and for infringing their own First Amendment free speech rights.
As we mentioned in a post earlier this week, granting copyright removes a work from the public domain, prompting Chief Justice John Roberts to ask: “What about Jimi Hendrix, right? He has a distinctive rendition of the national anthem, and assuming the national anthem is suddenly entitled to copyright protection that it wasn’t before, he can’t do that, right?”
The government’s response: “Maybe Jimi Hendrix could claim fair use.”
A decision in the case, Golan v. Holder, is expected by July.
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Copyright FAQ: When Is A Work In The Public Domain?
Today, using someone else’s work is often as easy as “cutting and pasting.” However, if you don’t follow the rules with regard to copyright law, you could end up involved in a costly copyright infringement lawsuit.
When deciding whether you can use someone else’s work without permission, there are a number of factors that must be taken into consideration. This post offers a brief look at works “in the public domain.” Tomorrow, we will look at another exception to copyright protections—the doctrine of fair use.
The Public Domain
Works that are deemed to be “in the public domain” may be used without permission. In most cases, works enter the public domain because their copyrights have expired. This explains why many older books can be uploaded on devices like iPads and Kindles for free.
While determining if a copyright has expired involves a bit of research and a little math, it is generally a fairly straightforward procedure.
We have provided a brief summary of the rules below:
- All works published in the United States before 1923 are in the public domain.
- Works published after 1922, but before 1978 are protected for 95 years from the date of publication. If the work was created, but not published, before 1978, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, even if the author died over 70 years ago, the copyright in an unpublished work lasts until December 31, 2002.
- For works published after 1977, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, if the work is a work for hire (that is, the work is done in the course of employment or has been specifically commissioned) or is published anonymously or under a pseudonym, the copyright lasts between 95 and 120 years, depending on the date the work is published.
- Lastly, if the work was published between 1923 and 1963, you must check with the U.S. Copyright Office to see whether the copyright was properly renewed. If the author failed to renew the copyright, the work has fallen into the public domain and you may use it. The renewal records for works published from 1950 to the present are available online at http://www.copyright.gov/.
Source: Nolo
At Sheldon Mak & Anderson, we recognize that innovation is your competitive edge – and it needs protection. As a full-service intellectual property firm with more than two decades of experience, we provide local, regional, national, and international legal services in the following areas: patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, IP litigation, international patent and trademark prosecution, licensing, alternative dispute resolution, and green technology.
Contact our knowledgeable intellectual property attorneys today at 1-855-UR IDEAS (1-855-874-3327) to find out how we can provide a powerful defense of your unique ideas.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
You're Invited!