Law and Innovation

For more than one hundred years, generations of FC Barcelona fans have witnessed amazing players wearing the famous Blaugrana shirt with garnet and blue vertical stripes. Adidas’s three-stripe mark is also particularly well-known among professional soccer players, fans, and consumers of soccer apparell. Over the years, the German company made headlines for filing a number of lawsuits in connection with its famous trademark; and this time, it’s against Futbol Club Barcelona! What’s the case all about? It’s not a secret, with football kit partnerships large sums of money are involved. On October 30, 2016, FC Barcelona ratified the record-breaking 10-year Nike kit deal, which is worth up to 155 million Euro annually from 2018. And guess what, the day after (on October 31) Adidas filed its opposition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). Coincidences of life or difference of opinion? Let’s take a closer look… Adidas has been for years (and still is) one

It's a good time to be a Star Wars fan! Not only the first new epic Lucasfilm 's spinoff Star Wars soon arrives in theaters (“Rogue One: A Star Wars Story”) but a new case involving Lucasfilm’s trademarks has been filed in California. The production company filed this action to protect against infringement of their intellectual property (IP) rights, including but not limited to their ownership of “Star Wars”, “Jedi”, “Lightsaber” trademarks, and the logo of the Jedi Order. Nearly 38 years after the original Star Wars movie hit the big screen, fans are still trying to use and feel the Force. Without success. In the meantime, Lucasfilm (owned by Disney) is engaged in the successful business of merchandising and licensing of distinctive characters and elements associated with their movies, and of course the protection of their IP rights. What’s the case all about? As you know, Lucasfilm owns several U.S trademarks, trade names, registrations, that incorporate and/or

Fresh and interesting article posted on TechCrunch about how Twitter's stock has been under pressure for months, as the company struggles to boost user growth and the potential sale. Happy reading! "Twitter continues to inch its way to a sale process, and the latest developments come in the form of alleged bids from potential buyers. Today CNBC is  reporting , and we have also independently heard, that both  Google  and  Salesforce  are interested in buying the company. We have additionally heard that  Microsoft  and  Verizon  have also been knocking, although  right now  Verizon (which also owns AOL, which owns us), may have a little  too much  on its plate. Twitter currently has a  market cap of $13.3 billion , and it opened for trading today with a jump of nearly 22%, in response to all these whispers. Google, Microsoft and Verizon have been reported as potential suitors in the past (one recent article  here ), and what we’re hearing about the Microso

Let's celebrate! The Belgian Red Devils advance to Euro 2016 quarterfinals . Companies, marketers, and non-sponsors brands are now preparing for the next exciting in-house event, contest, etc. using the logos, mascots, signs, of the UEFA. But be aware of the limit of your rights to avoid a red card. It’s important to understand the rules of the game; no one needs the costs of a lawsuit for going offside. What are the risks? UEFA holds several registered figurative and word trademarks relating to this football tournament. These trademarks are protected at the European level offering the UEFA an unified system of protection throughout the 28 Member states. These trademarks are simultaneously protected in a very large number of other worldwide jurisdictions through the Madrid System. Among others: The word trademarks: UEFA EURO 2016 , EURO 2016 , UEFA , UEFA EUROPEAN FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP ; The figurative trademarks: UEFA EURO 2016 FRANCE , the bid process logo, EURO 2

This article originally appeared on  IP Flow  at  http://mimesislaw.com/category/ipflow   The European Commission (EC) antitrust team and Google are continually at loggerheads. The latest: a   formal antitrust complaint   over Android and another separate complaint on prioritization of shopping search results. This investigation is the second major case between the two frenemies.     What’s going on ? The EC is claiming that Google has abused its dominant position by imposing restrictions on Android device manufacturers and mobile operators and by promoting its services and apps. To be in a dominant position in Europe is not in itself illegal, but the company has a special responsibility to ensure that its conduct does not distort competition ( Article 102 TFEU ). What kind of business practices the EC is objecting to ? As explained in the  complaint , Google breaches EU antitrust rules by: “Requiring manufacturers to pre-install Google Search and Google’s Chrome browser a

Apple’s success story is well-known: “Before 2007, mobile phones were bulky, inelegantly designed boxes with multiple buttons and protruding antennas”. The context hasn’t changed either: Samsung, faced with a crisis of design, “ made a deliberate decision to copy the iPhone’s innovative look and many of its other features, and its mobile devices became iPhone clones ”. And now we know the result: the petition for writ of certiorari (request for U.S. Supreme Court review) is granted, at least, to question 2 (see below). The tone in Apple’s brief opposition petition for writ of certiorari ("cert. petition"; a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to hear a case) seemed strong, but wasn’t good enough to convince the SCOTUS not to review the Federal Circuit's decision (786 F.3d 983). After a 120-year hiatus, the highest judicial body in the United States will, again, examine the valuation of design patents. Apple did however “win” regarding the scope of the d

Fresh and interesting article posted on Apple Insider about the ongoing case between Apple and VirnetX and the jury verdict costing the American multinational technology company $625.6 million . It now seems that Apple is seeking a mistrial; in other words, t he right to a fair trial.  Happy reading!  "After objecting to the closing arguments made by Caldwell, Cassady & Curry attorneys representing VirnetX, Apple has now filed a motion for mistrial in the case that awarded a $625 million verdict after just a week of testimony and deliberation. According to a  report  by  Texas Lawyer , Apple's motion for mistral argues that VirnetX lawyers' closing remarks to the jury included "arguments outside the evidence and blatantly misrepresented the testimony of Apple's witnesses." The East Texas trial made headlines this week after a jury returned a  verdict  finding Apple guilty of willfully infringing on four VirnetX patents in products including

Fresh and interesting article posted on WIPR about the East Texas Federal District Court jury verdict that ordered Apple to pay $626 million to (patent troll) VirnetX for willfully infringing patents with FaceTime, iMessage, and VPN services. Time for a U.S. patent reform!? Happy reading! "A Texas court has ruled that Apple infringed four patents owned by licensing company VirnetX and has ordered the technology company to pay $625 million in damages. Yesterday, February 3, a jury at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ruled that Apple’s FaceTime, iMessage and VPN On Demand services infringed the patents. All four patents cover an online secure communication network. According to the final order, VirnetX proved through a “preponderance of evidence” that Apple was liable for infringement. In total, the court  awarded  VirnetX $625.6 million in damages. Jason Cassady, principal at Caldwell, Cassady & Curry and representing VirnetX,  said : “We are th

Fresh and interesting  post about the future  Unified Patent Court Agreement. Happy reading!  In 2012, the European member states agreed on “unitary patent package” consisting of three elements: two Regulations and an international Agreement. On the one hand, two regulations ( Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2012 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection and Council Regulation (EU) No. 1260/2012 of 17 December 2012 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection with regard to the applicable translation arrangements ), dealing with the creation of the unitary patent protection and the translation arrangements, which entered into force in January 2013. On the other hand, an international court, set up by treaty (“Agreement on a Unified Patent Court”), with divisions located all over Europe. As a reminder, in early 2013, 25 EU me

Fresh and interesting article posted on the IPKat about patent trolls/PAE/NPE and how the U.S. is willing (trying?) to tackle them.  Happy reading!  "At 6:30AM the planes started taking off from San Jose's airport.   Turns out the hotel is in a flight path.  Win.  Normally, this would have woken the AmeriKat but she was already wide awake.  Was it the thrill of turning a year older?  Unlikely.  Was it the jet lag?  Maybe.  Was it the excitement of being in a valley so inundated with innovation you can't swing a Kat without hitting a patent?  Most definitely.  January is almost always an incredibly bleak month in northern Europe (weather wise).  Cold, dark, rainy and miserable.  So the AmeriKat has decided to perk up her whiskers by taking a dose of California sun and American innovative spirit by relocating to Silicon Valley where she reports on the latest goings-on in the world of US patent litigation. Much ado about the patent troll problem:   Earlier this month, a