#ipcentral

[nisagrowthhacker]

Presentation Competition 2018 #authenticventure #ipcentral (at Kompleks Diamond, BB Bangi)

[lsag-aba-ipl]

CLE Review: Do Domains Really Matter?

By: Wesley Paisley (@WesleyPaisley)

The CLE: Do Domains Really Matter? was moderated by Chrissie Scelsi, with speakers Reg Levy and Dennis Prahl. 

Do Domains Really Matter?”. When I first read the title of the CLE, I thought of course they do. I do not expect, when I open up my trusty browser and type in a brand name into a search engine that I will not be able to find the domain for my favorite brand. When I want soda, I pick up a S.Pellegrino, and when I want to look for it on a website I look for it at www[dot]sanpellegrino[dot]com, obviously not sparkly soda. For the most part I know it will always be at [dot]com.

However the gtld ICANN policies aim to expand the language of the domain. Let’s go back to my original hypo, of looking for a soda. The soda is created by an Italian company, so should I go to sanpelligrino.it, sanpelligrino.us, or sodaitaliani.it? Similarly, if a friend from Korea wants to get access to their Korean brand version, do they go to 이탈리아어 소다.kr ? Reg Levy, the first speaker, explained that while the average user may see this as superfluous, it actually aids the protection of the brand. In our modern world where consumers have many choices, brand owners have to be on top of their game. As Mr. Levy pointed out on twitter, the gTLDs will adjust for the character differences among countries, such as Chinese domains will have traditional and simplified characters.

@RegLevy Aug 7 @wesleypaisley China's ccTLDs include ".cn" and ".中国". Hong Kong and Taiwan also have Chinese-language ccTLDs.

Mr. Levy also noted that ICANN has implemented a domain resolution policy to defend against domain disputes, cyber-squatters and typo cyber-squatters to squash these unwanted behaviors. With ICANN's domain registration policies, companies or agents would have to show why they want to register domains such as "Facebock". As Reg noted, unless you are named Facebock, it's going to be difficult to overcome evidence of bad faith to register that name. 

Dennis Prahl then revealed that businesses have options for defending their marks across multiple domains, including search services which identify trademark violators on the internet. 

Mr. Prahl then discussed the ongoing debate between search engine optimizers (SEOs) and domain owners. Well-known domain owners want browsers to auto-correct a user's typographical error, causing the the user to navigate to their website. However, an SEO ad manager would probably want the mistake to happen so that the user would have to click on one of their ads to be redirected to the proper domain.

Mr. Prahl also discussed dispute resolution on the international scale. He highlighted the Asian Doman Name Dispute Resolution Centre, which provides a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy for companies. He also noted that the concept of bad faith varies among countries, and the controlling standard depends on the country that the infringing domain is registered in. These differing standards can greatly affect a case. For example, posting SEO ads is evidence of bad faith under the Canadian Dispute Resolution Policy. Mr. Prahl also broke down the cost of domain dispute resolution. 

During the question and answer segment, an audience member asked if a domain registration company can be sued for infringement or contributory infringement. The answer: maybe. It might be difficult to sue domain registration companies since they have contractual obligations to supposed infringers. This makes an ISP take-down the better strategy.

If you were unable to attend the ABA Annual in Boston on April 7-8, 2014 in person, you may catch up on everything you missed by reading the tweets and blog entries of the ABA-IPL’s Law Student Reporters— look for #IPCENTRAL hashtag.

[lsag-aba-ipl]

Committee Recap: Trade Secrets and Interferences with Contracts Committee

By Melissa Lauretti

In light of pending federal legislation and recent court rulings, the trade secrets field is dynamic and quickly-evolving. If you would like to remain abreast of developments in the trade secrets realm and actively participate in crafting policy and educational initiatives, consider joining the ABA-IPL Section’s Trade Secrets and Interferences with Contracts Committee.

Led by Chair Robert Milligan, a Partner in the Litigation and Labor & Employment Departments of Seyfarth Shaw LLP and Co-Chair of its Trade Secrets, Non-Compete and Computer Fraud Group, and Vice Chair Martin Chester, a Partner at Faegre Baker Daniels who specializes in complex business disputes, the Trade Secrets and Interferences with Contracts Committee focuses on legal and policy issues in the trade secrets, unfair interference with contractual rights, and unfair competition fields at the federal, state, and international levels. The Committee recently completed its 2013-2014 Annual Review of Trade Secret Cases, and this year’s publication includes hacking and data theft cases, in addition to international cases.

The Committee plans to meet every other month via conference call and intends to host at least three events, which may include in-person programs and webinars, in the coming year. All are welcome to join the committee and participate in its initiatives, including early-career lawyers and law students. In April, the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014 was introduced in the United States Senate, and in July, the Trade Secrets Protection Act of 2014 was introduced in the United States House of Representatives. Accordingly, in addition to a formal resolution,  the Committee would like to compose a white paper that analyzes and discusses empirical evidence supporting a federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation and is looking for Committee members to lead this project. 

To learn more about the Trade Secrets and Interferences with Contracts Committee or to join the Committee, please click here. 

The Trade Secrets and Interferences with Contracts Committee meeting was covered by Melissa Lauretti, a 3L at the University of Connecticut School of Law in Hartford, Connecticut. 

[lsag-aba-ipl]

#CLE Preview: "Patent Challenges before the USPTO: Lessons Learned Since their Inception under the AIA"

By Lydea Irwin (@PatentlyLydea)

The America Invents Act, or AIA, was signed into law in September of 2011. The AIA made a number of changes to the U.S. patent system, including two new ways to challenge patents before the USPTO, inter partes review and post grant review, which took effect in September 2012. Inter partes review allows parties to challenge a patent on the basis of prior art, while post grant reviews look at the patentability of one or more claims in a patent.

 This CLE, moderated by Jon Grossman, of Dickstein Shapiro, will focus on these two new proceedings. The speakers include Denise DeFranco, a patent litigator and partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner; Greg Morris, a patent litigator with Paul Hastings; Todd Walters, an inter partes specialist at Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney; and Hon. Michael Tierney, a judge at the USPTO. The group will discuss how the AIA has affected the practice of patent law, and how to be successful in these proceedings.

 “Patent Challenges before the USPTO: Lessons Learned Since their Inception under the AIA” will be held from 10:30 am to 12:00 pm on Thursday, August 7, 2014 at the ABA Annual Meeting in Boston, MA.

If you can’t make it to IP Central at the 2014 ABA Annual Meeting this year, you can still follow all the action by following the tweets and blog entries of the ABA-IPL’s Law Student Reporters, who will be covering all the events of the Conference on Twitter.  You do not have to sign up for Twitter to follow the Law Student Reports.  Just bookmark the #IPCentral Twitter page and revisit the link from August 7-8, 2014 to follow all the action.

Lydea Irwin, a third year JD/MBA student at the University of New Hampshire School of Law, will report on this CLE.

Image Credit: Flickr/opensourceway

[lsag-aba-ipl]

#CLE Preview: The End of the Electronic Wars?: A New Era of Creative Patent Licensing

By: Lydea Irwin (@PatentlyLydea)

Recently, Samsung and Google entered into a broad cross-licensing agreement, covering some existing and future patents. Microsoft and Canon also have a new cross-licensing agreement.

These cross-licensing agreements allow all parties involved to benefit from any and all of the patents involved in the agreement.

 This CLE will focus on the business, intellectual property, and antitrust issues involved with cross-licenses. One topic will be how two competitors or two members of a supply chain would approach cross-licensing.

 “With Samsung and Apple and others entering into broad cross-licenses in the past year, we believe this topic is very timely.  Some in the press have forecasted that agreements like this may mean the end of the smartphone wars and other large, industry-wide patent litigations.  We will explore that topic, as well.” – Moderator Kim Parke.

Kim Parke will be leading the CLE “The End of the Electronic Wars?: A New Era of Creative Patent Licensing.” The program will feature Eric Grannon of White & Case, Jon Grossman of Dickstein Shapiro, and Changehae Park from Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.

If you are interested in learning the ramifications and benefits from cross-licensing then this CLE, which will be held from 8:30 to 10:00 am on Friday, August 8th, 2014 at the ABA annual meeting in Boston, MA, is your opportunity.

Lydea Irwin, a third year JD/MBA student at the University of New Hampshire School of Law, will report on this CLE.

Image Credit: Flickr/Frans de Wit

[lsag-aba-ipl]

CLE Preview: “The Brave New World of Prosecution Under AIA First-Inventor-To-File Provisions”

By: Conor Flynn

Arm yourself for the “Brave New World of Prosecution” under the AIA’s First-to-File provisions by attending this CLE program, where speakers will discuss how the new definition of “prior art” in the Act impacts patent drafting and prosecution. Speakers will outline how practitioners can draft and prosecute strong patents and minimize potential post-grant attacks. Further, panelists will share and discuss lessons learned and prosecution changes seen over the past year, as well as strategies and points to be aware of for the future.

The program will be moderated by Donna M. Meuth, Associate General Counsel for Intellectual Property at Eisai. Additional program speakers include Robert A. Armitage, currently a consultant on IP Strategy, and former Senior VP and General Counsel at Eli Lilly; Tom Irving, Partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner; and Teresa Stanek Rea, Partner at Crowell & Moring, and former acting director at the USPTO.

If you can’t make it to IP Central at the 2014 ABA Annual Meeting this year, you can still follow all the action by following the tweets and blog entries of the ABA-IPL’s Law Student Reporters, who will be covering all the events of the Conference on Twitter.  You do not have to sign up for Twitter to follow the Law Student Reports.  Just bookmark the #IPCentral Twitter page and revisit the link from August 7-8, 2014 to follow all the action.

"Brave New World of Prosecution Under AIA First-Inventor-To-File Provisions" will be held on Thursday, August 7, 2014 from 8:00 am – 10:00 am at the ABA Annual Meeting in Boston, MA.

The CLE program will be covered by Conor Flynn, a third-year law student at SUNY Buffalo Law School.

Image Credit: Flickr/Kazuhisa OTSUBO

[lsag-aba-ipl]

Meet #LSR Wesley Paisley!

Wesley Paisley is a rising 3L at New York Law School in New York City. He is interested in all things regarding Intellectual Property, White-Collar Prosecution, Digital Media Policy, Video games, and Consumer Protection. He likes to explore the legal underpinnings behind the veil of arguments. Furthermore, he loves to explore and follow current legal trends.

Wesley received his Masters in Science from Polytechnic University in Integrated Digital Media. He used his degree to explore all types of media and how they interact with the world. He is a front-end developer and designer by day and legal student at night. Wesley hopes to able to mix these dynamic skills to help small and large businesses navigate through complexity of local and international regulations.

However, all work and no play makes Wesley a dull person. Thankfully, Wesley volunteers at different organizations that help a range of people from different backgrounds, including volunteering at a Meatloaf kitchen in the lower east side, following events from Black Girls Code, and helping out at Sunday school.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/WesleyPaisley

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/creationsbywes/

Tumblr: http://legal-wp.tumblr.com/

Favorite ABAIPL Committee: Copyright and New Technologies Committee

"Most Looking Forward to" CLE Program: Do Domains Really Matter?: An Examination of the Business and Legal Issues Related to the Domain Market

Favorite IP Case: Universal City Studios, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., Nintendo of America, Inc., Defendants-Appellees., 797 F.2d 70 (2nd Cir. 1986) OR the district ct. trial: Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Nintendo Co. Ltd., 615 F. Supp. 838, 841 aff'd, 797 F.2d 70 (2d Cir. 1986) and opinion clarified, 726 F. Supp. 928 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)