Copyright FAQ: Is a Copyright Notice Required?

U.S. law no longer requires the use of a copyright notice. However, prior law did contain such a requirement, and the use
of a notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works.
Works published before January 1, 1978, are governed by the previous copyright law. Under that law, if a work was published under the copyright owner’s authority without a proper notice of copyright, all copyright protection for that work was permanently lost in the United States.

The Benefits of a Copyright Notice

Although a copyright notice is not required, it is certainly beneficial. A copyright notice informs the public that a work is protected by copyright, identifies the copyright owner, and shows the year of first publication.
More importantly, in the event that a work is infringed, if a copyright notice was used, the court will not give any weight to a defendant’s claim that he or she did not realize that the work was protected (referred to as an innocent infringement defense).

How to Create a Copyright Notice

In general, in order to be valid, a copyright notice should contain:

• The symbol © (letter C in a circle); the word “Copyright”; or the abbreviation “Copr.”
• The date of publication, and
• The name of either the author or the owner of all the copyright rights in the published work.

Example: © 2011 Jane Doe

How We Can Help

Of course, this post provides only a broad overview of copyright notices. If you are seeking to copyright a work, it is advisable to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney.

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 powerful protection for your unique ideas.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

USPTO Announces Changes to Two Patent Programs

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced that the Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan and the Green Technology Pilot Program will be phased out. Going forward, the USPTO is encouraging applicants to take advantage of the Prioritized Examination Track (Track I), which allows applicants, for a fee, to have their patent applications processed to final disposition within 12 months from prioritized status being granted.

The Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan

The Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan is available if the applicant expressly abandons another copending unexamined application. The USPTO has announced that the program has fulfilled its purpose and will not be extended through its current expiration date of December 31, 2011.

The Green Technology Pilot Program

The Green Technology Pilot Program is available to patent applications pertaining to environmental quality, energy conservation, development of renewable energy resources, and greenhouse gas emission reduction. This plan will be extended until 500 additional applications have been accorded special status under this program or until March 30, 2012, whichever occurs earlier. Following the expiration of this extension, the program will be eliminated

Source: USPTO

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 powerful protection for your unique ideas.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

Update: Lawmakers Release SOPA Alternative

Earlier this month, lawmakers introduced legislation intended to serve as an alternative to the Stop Online Piracy Act. The bill’s sponsors, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), are asking the Internet community to weigh in on the bill and suggest changes.

As we discussed in a previous blog post, SOPA is intended to crack down on online copyright infringement. Tech giants such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Yahoo oppose the bill, saying that it would require them to essentially police the Internet, and could stunt the growth of innovation and job creation on the Web.

The Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act would expand the authority of U.S. International Trade Commission with respect to intellectual-property infringement complaints. Using the ITC’s intellectual property (IP) enforcement expertise will make it possible “to go after legitimate cases of IP abuse without doing irreparable harm to the Internet,” Wyden said in a statement.

“It is our hope that proponents of other approaches won’t just dismiss our proposal, but will instead take this opportunity to engage us on the substance,” he added. “Yes, IP infringement is a problem, but the Internet has become such an important part of our economy and our way of life that it is essential for us to get the policies that shape its future right.”

How Would OPEN Work?

Under OPEN, U.S. copyright holders would be able to petition the ITC to investigate cases of illegal digital imports, using a process similar to the current process for investigating infringement cases involving physical goods. If an ITC investigation finds that a foreign-registered website is “primarily” and “willfully” infringing on the rights of a U.S. copyright holder, the commission would issue a cease-and-desist order that would compel third parties, such as payment processors and online advertising providers, to cease conducting business with that website.

What’s Next?

At KeeptheWebOpen.com, visitors can submit comments, suggest edits, and ask questions about the legislation. Visitor feedback will allow the lawmakers fine-tune the legislation, the lawmakers said in a press release.

In the meantime, we will continue to monitor the progress of both OPEN and SOPA.

Source: Networkworld.com

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 powerful protection for your unique ideas.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

Blackberry Name Snafu Highlights Importance of Trademark Research

Smart phone maker Research in Motion recently demonstrated the importance of conducting trademark research before committing to a name for your product. Less than two months after the maker of the Blackberry devices announced that its new operating system would be called BBX, the company was forced to alter course. It will now be called BlackBerry 10.

The change was prompted by a restraining order secured in federal court by a small Albuquerque-based software maker, Basis International. The company has long used the name BBx on its own software products.

After RIM announced the BBX name at a developers’ conference in San Francisco in October, Basis sought a permanent injunction under trademark laws. It also asked for the temporary order to prevent RIM from using the name at its developer’s conference in Singapore this month.

In a statement on Wednesday about the name change, RIM did not acknowledge the trademark infringement action by Basis International. “The BlackBerry 10 name reflects the significance of the new platform and will leverage the global strength of the BlackBerry brand while also aligning perfectly with RIM’s device branding,” the statement said.

Source: NY Times

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.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

Copyright FAQ: Can a Copyright Owner Transfer His Rights?

As with any other property right, any or all of a copyright owner’s exclusive rights may be transferred. In fact, it is quite common when a copyright owner wants to commercially exploit the work covered by the copyright. Of course, there are certain rules and requirements that must be followed to ensure that a transfer is legally enforceable and protects the rights of the parties involved.

For instance, if a copyright owner seeks to transfer his exclusive rights, the transfer must be made in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or his duly authorized agent. Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require a written agreement.

A copyright may also be conveyed by operation of law. For example, a copyright may be bequeathed by will or pass as personal property by the applicable laws of intestate succession.

Types of Transfers

Transfers of copyright are normally made by contract, under the terms of which the copyright owner may restrict the terms of the transfer. For instance, the owner may limit the transfer to a specific period of time or certain type of media.

If a copyright owner transfers all of his rights unconditionally, it is generally termed an “assignment.” When only some of the rights associated with the copyright are transferred, it is referred to as a “license.”

An exclusive license is created when the transferred rights can be exercised only by the owner of the license, and no one else—including the person who granted the license. If the license allows others to exercise the same rights being transferred in the license, the license is deemed non-exclusive.

Recording a Transfer

Although recordation is not required to create a valid transfer between the parties, transfers may be recorded with the U.S. Copyright Office. In fact, it is often advisable. Recordation offers certain legal advantages and may be required to validate the transfer as against third parties.

How We Can Help

Of course, this post provides only a broad overview of the copyright transfer process. If you are seeking to transfer your rights, it is advisable to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney.

Sources: Copyright.gov and Stanford.edu

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.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

Patent FAQ: What Is a Provisional Patent?

A provisional application for patent allows filing without a formal patent claim, oath or declaration, or any information disclosure (prior art) statement. A Provisional patent offers several advantages: It provides the means to establish an early effective filing date in a later filed non-provisional patent application. It also allows the term “Patent Pending” to be applied in connection with the description of the invention.

How Does It Work?

A provisional application for patent (provisional application) has a pendency lasting 12 months from the date the provisional application is filed. It is important to note that the 12-month pendency period cannot be extended. Therefore, an applicant who files a provisional application must file a corresponding non-provisional application for patent during the 12-month pendency period of the provisional application in order to benefit from the earlier filing of the provisional application.

Are There Any Limitations?

While applying for a provisional patent often makes sense, as it gets the ball rolling to protect an invention, it does have some limitations.

As outlined by the USPTO, they include the following:

• The benefits of the provisional application cannot be claimed if the 12-month deadline for filing a non-provisional application has expired.
• A provisional application cannot result in a U. S. patent unless one of the following two events occur within 12 months of the provisional application filing date: 1. a corresponding non-provisional application for patent entitled to a filing date is filed that claims the benefit of the earlier filed provisional application; or 2. a grantable petition to convert the provisional application into a non-provisional application is filed.
• Provisional applications for patent may not be filed for design inventions.
• Provisional applications are not examined on their merits.
• Provisional applications for patent cannot claim the benefit of a previously-filed application, either foreign or domestic.
• In order to obtain the benefit of the filing date of a provisional application, the claimed subject matter in the later filed non-provisional application must have support in the provisional application.
• The non-provisional application must have at least one inventor in common with the inventor(s) named in the provisional application to claim benefit of the provisional application filing date.
• Amendments are not permitted in provisional applications after filing, other than those to make the provisional application comply with applicable regulations.

How We Can Help

Of course, this post provides only a broad overview of provisional patents. If you are seeking to patent an invention, it is advisable to consult with an experienced intellectual property attorney.

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.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...

Patent Litigation: Supreme Court Decision to Impact Medical Industry

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Mayo v Prometheus. As we noted in an earlier blog post, the issue before the Court is whether Prometheus Labs should be allowed to patent a correlation between drug metabolite levels and patient health under 35 U.S.C. §101.

The Facts of the Case

The patents at issue concern tests for the effectiveness of thiopurines, drugs that are routinely used to treat a variety of gastrointestinal disorders. Their effect depends on how they are metabolized. The patents cover the process for determining whether a given dose produces concentrations of metabolites within a recommended range and allows doctors to adjust it accordingly.

Prometheus sells a test based on its patents to hospitals and clinics. In 2004, Mayo developed a competing test, featuring different recommended levels of metabolites. Citing patent infringement, Prometheus sued.

The Legal Arguments

As we mentioned last week, patent law does not allow patents of nature and abstract ideas. Rather, patents can be issued for a machine, article of manufacture, composition of matter, or process. In many cases, it is easy to determine if an invention fits into one of these categories. However, when it comes to technology, the analysis is often more complicated.

Future medical advances, Prometheus argued in its brief, will likely concern “uniquely targeted treatments” based on an individual’s genetic makeup. In order to foster development, these discoveries should be afforded patent protection.

However, as Justice Stephen G. Breyer put it: “What has to be added to a law of nature to make it a patentable process?”

On this question, Mayo’s lawyers contend Prometheus has patented a mere observation of the body’s natural workings. The federal government seems to agree, claiming that “you can’t get a patent by tacking a mental step onto an utterly conventional process for administering drugs and testing their effects.”

The Implications

Many predict that the Supreme Court’s decision will have broad implications on the future of personalized medicine. It will also likely impact research firms and drug makers, particularly those that are studying genetic correlations that might predict a drug’s efficacy or determine the cause of a disease.

As evidenced by the questioning by the Court, there is likely no easy test to determine the patentability of medical processes. It will be interesting to see what the Court decides when its decision is issued next spring.

Source: The Washington Post

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.

[+/-] read more...

[+/-] show only summary...