DOCSLIB.ORG

Intellectual Property

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intellectual Property October 2013 Vol. 53, No. 1 ILLINOIS STATE BAR ASSOCIATION Intellectual Property The newsletter of the Illinois State Bar Association’s Section on Intellectual Property Law Trademark Trial and Appeal Board not flip INSIDE about the bird By Steven L. Baron and Natalie A. Harris Trademark Trial and Appeal Board not flip he Trademark Trial and Appeal Board holic beverages.5 Following the USPTO’s refusal, about the bird . 1 (“TTAB”) ruled hands down against the Luxuria appealed to the TTAB. maker of a beverage bottle that gives After the parties submitted their respective Torrent Wars: Copyright T 1 consumers the finger. On September 19, 2011, appeal briefs, Luxuria filed a remand request for trolls, legitimate IP rights, the TTAB affirmed the United States Patent and consideration of additional evidence.6 The al- and the need for new Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) refusal to register a legedly late-breaking evidence included articles rules vetting evidence trademark application for “a bottle in the shape suggesting that the middle finger is losing its and to amend the of a hand with the middle finger extended up- shock value;7 can be used to express something Copyright Act . 1 wards” on the grounds that the proposed mark is as benign as excitement over new shoes8 and “immoral” or “scandalous” within the meaning of is often used “in a cheeky and fun manner, be- Breaches of privacy 2 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a). tween friends.”9 The TTAB determined that Luxu- and data—New risks, On March 12, 2008, Luxuria, s.r.o. (“Luxuria”), a ria failed to demonstrate “good cause” for the re- new insurance . 7 Czech company, filed an application based on its quested remand, in part because it was not clear 3 international registration depicting a beverage that the material was not previously available.10 Intellectual bottle flashing “the universal signal of discon- ImprobabilitiesTM . 8 tent”4 for beers and other alcoholic and nonalco- Continued on page 2 Upcoming CLE programs . 10 Torrent Wars: Copyright trolls, legitimate IP (Notice to librarians: The following issues were published in Volume 52 of this news- rights, and the need for new rules vetting letter during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013: September, No. 1; December, No. 2; evidence and to amend the Copyright Act March, No. 3; May, No. 4; June, No. 5). By Jeffrey Antonelli torrent1 is a technical name for a new way often took a few minutes (sometimes an hour or If you're getting of sharing electronic files across the inter- more). Millions became familiar with the prog- this newsletter Anet. When the internet was young, people ress bar watching it countdown from 0 to 100% by postal mail were encouraged to “surf the web” and explore a complete. Then came Napster, a new software new way of sharing information across vast dis- program that allowed faster distribution of those and would tances and in remarkable time. An e-mail from electronic files, opening up the ability to quickly prefer electronic the United States to Europe could receive a reply share files with thousands or millions of others. delivery, just in a matter of minutes. Electronic files contain- Today, a program called BitTorrent is spurring ing a photograph, a document, or even a short a new wave of internet file sharing, and along send an e-mail to movie clip could be downloaded with the click Ann Boucher at of a mouse. Using a 56k modem connection this Answers on page 3 [email protected] Intellectual Property | October, Vol. 53, No. 1 Trademark Trial and Appeal Board not flip about the bird Intellectual Property Continued from page 1 The TTAB allowed Luxuria to file a second SCHLONG crocheted fabric covers for glass Published at least four times per year. request for remand supported by a showing water pipes and male penises.20 It seems the Annual subscription rate for ISBA of good cause, specifically recommending TTAB may not quite have its finger on the members: $25. an affidavit regarding Luxuria’s efforts -dur pulse of contemporary attitudes towards To subscribe, visit www.isba.org ■ ing prosecution to obtain the additional evi- scandal and immorality. or call 217-525-1760 dence.11 Luxuria did file a second request for __________ remand, but did not lift a finger with respect Mr. Baron, <[email protected]>, is a partner and Ms. Harris, <NHarris@Mandell- Office to providing details about the steps it took Illinois Bar Center to search for the evidence during prosecu- Menkes.com>, is an associate with the law firm of Mandell Menkes LLC. © Mandell Menkes LLC, 2013 424 S. Second Street tion. Accordingly, the TTAB denied Luxuria’s Springfield, IL 62701 12 request for remand. 1. Phones: 217-525-1760 OR 800-252-8908 Luxuria filed its reply brief and attached www.isba.org the very same evidence it had sought to Editor make of record through its prior requests for Daniel Kegan remand.13 Luxuria crossed its fingers, hoping Kegan & Kegan, Ltd. the TTAB would turn a blind eye. However, 79 W. Monroe St., Ste. 1320 the TTAB caught Luxuria red-handed: “We 2. In re Luxuria s.r.o, 100 USPQ 2d 1146 (TTAB Chicago, IL 60603-4969 cannot help but note the convergence be- 2011). 3. According to the WIPO database for the Managing Editor/ tween applicant’s actions toward the Board Production 14 Madrid System for the International Registration and the message conveyed by its mark.” As of Marks, Luxuria’s mark (International Registra- Katie Underwood a result, the TTAB disregarded Luxuria’s entire tion No. 969241) is registered in Australia, Japan, [email protected] reply brief, including the attached evidence. Namibia, Norway and Zambia. The same mark Luxuria may have let an opportunity slip was refused registration in Belarus, China, Cuba, Intellectual Property through its fingers by failing to make its evi- Cypress, Morocco, Mozambique, Serbia, Russian Section Council Federation, Singapore, Turkey and the Ukraine. dence of record. The TTAB acknowledged Shannon AR Bond, Chair <http://www.wipo.int/romarin//detail.do?ID=0>. Joseph T. Nabor, Vice Chair that “[w]hether the mark consists of or com- 4. People v. Meyers, 352 Ill.App.3d 790, 794 (2nd Christopher J. McGeehan, Secretary prises scandalous matter must be deter- Dist. 2004). Charles L. Mudd, Jr., Ex-Officio 5. In re Luxuria, 100 USPQ 2d at 1146. mined from the standpoint of a substantial David M. Adler Yanling Jiang composite of the general public (although 6. In re Luxuria, 100 USPQ 2d at 1147. 7. TTAB Proceeding No. 79055664, Applicant’s Patrick Arnold, Jr. Daniel Kegan not necessarily a majority), and in the con- Request To Suspend and Remand Appeal For Con- Barbara B. Bressler Nicole E. Kopinski 15 text of contemporary attitudes.” Further- sideration of Additional Evidence, filed Nov. 30, Dennis F. Esford Adam BE Lied more, some evidence properly in the record 2009 at Ex. A (Martha Irvine, Is the Middle finger James G. Fahey Alan R. Singleton Deirdre A. Fox Eric R. Waltmire suggested that “the finger” “can be a strange, Losing Its Shock Value?, Columbian, Feb. 26, 2003). Eugene F. Friedman Alan M. Zulanas friendly greeting for some” and that the 8. Id. at Ex. B (Ira P. Robbins, Digitus Impudicus: The Middle Finger and the Law, 41 U.C. Davis L. Rev. Rachel McDermott, Staff Liaison gesture can be found in film, television and 1403, 1407-8 (2008)). 16 Bridget C. Duignan, Board Liaison political contexts. Luxuria may have laid 9. Id at p.3 and Ex. C. Joseph T. Nabor, CLE Coordinator its finger on critical evidence demonstrating 10. In re Luxuria, 100 USPQ 2d 1147. Deirdre A. Fox, CLE Coordinator 11. Id. the changing nature of the general public’s Lewis F. Matuszewich, CLE Committee Liaison perception of “the bird,” but its procedural 12. Id. 13. Id. misstep cooked the goose. 14. Id. at 1148, fn 3. The TTAB concluded that the gesture 15. Id. at 1148 (citing In re Boulevard Ent., Inc., depicted by Luxuria’s mark is the visual 334 F. 3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2003)). Disclaimer: This newsletter is for subscribers’ per- equivalent of the extremely offensive exple- 16. Id. at 1150. sonal use only; redistribution is prohibited. Copyright 17. Id at 1151. Illinois State Bar Association. Statements or expressions tive “f*** you,” and noted that “[j]ust as these of opinion appearing herein are those of the authors 18. U.S. Serial No. 85322631 words would be considered scandalous and and not necessarily those of the Association or Editors, 19. U.S. Serial No. 3621024 and likewise the publication of any advertisement is not immoral if used as a trademark. .the visual to be construed as an endorsement of the product or depiction of these words by the finger ges- service offered unless it is specifically stated in the ad 20. The mark consists of the that there is such approval or endorsement. ture shown in applicant’s mark is equally Articles are prepared as an educational service to 17 stylized text “BongSchlong protector.” The word scandalous and immoral.” The TTAB’s deci- members of ISBA. They should not be relied upon as a “protector” appears under the letters “Schlong” in sion to point the finger at Luxuria appears substitute for individual legal research. “BongSchlong.” The stem of the letter “B” is made The articles in this newsletter are not intended to be particularly arbitrary in light of USPTO re- from a phallus symbol. (U.S. Serial No. 85344882). used and may not be relied on for penalty avoidance. cords reflecting live registrations for FUK U Postmaster: Please send address changes to the 18 19 Illinois State Bar Association, 424 S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Copyright 2018 4Th Edition a Practical Cross-Border Insight Into Copyright Law
    ICLG The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Copyright 2018 4th Edition A practical cross-border insight into copyright law Published by Global Legal Group, in association with Bird & Bird LLP With contributions from: Anderson Mōri & Tomotsune KISCH IP Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP LexOrbis Bereskin & Parr LLP LPS L@w Bird & Bird LLP MinterEllison BROSS & PARTNERS PEREZ CORREA & ASOCIADOS, SC Daniel Legal & IP Strategy S. P. A. Ajibade & Co Deep & Far Attorneys-at-Law Seow & Associates FRORIEP Legal SA SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan Gorodissky & Partners (Ukraine) Vash Patent LLC Güzeldere & Balkan Law Firm Weisselberg Avocat HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER ZY Partners JIPYONG The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Copyright 2018 General Chapter: 1 Communication to the Public: the Only Right Worth Talking About? – Will Smith & Phil Sherrell, Bird & Bird LLP 1 Contributing Editor Country Question and Answer Chapters: Phil Sherrell, Bird & Bird LLP 2 Australia MinterEllison: John Fairbairn & Emily Hawcroft 7 Sales Director Florjan Osmani 3 Brazil Daniel Legal & IP Strategy: Giovanna M. Sgaria de Morais Moulin & Account Director Hannah Vitória M. Fernandes 14 Oliver Smith Sales Support Manager 4 Canada Bereskin & Parr LLP: Jill Jarvis-Tonus 20 Toni Hayward 5 China ZY Partners: Zhou Qiang & Deng Huiqiong 26 Senior Editors Suzie Levy, Rachel Williams 6 France Weisselberg Avocat: Elise Weisselberg 32 Chief Operating Officer Dror Levy 7 Germany HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER: Thomas H. Schmitz & Mathis Breuer 37 Group Consulting Editor Alan Falach 8 India LexOrbis: Dheeraj Kapoor & Aprajita Nigam 42 Publisher Rory Smith 9 Japan Anderson Mōri & Tomotsune: Masayuki Yamanouchi & Yuri Fukui 49 Published by 10 Korea JIPYONG: Seung Soo Choi & Seungmin Jasmine Jung 55 Global Legal Group Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Osiris Secure Social Backup
    James Bown Osiris Secure Social Backup Computer Science Tripos, Part II Project St John’s College May 17, 2011 The cover page image is the hieroglyphic representation of the Ancient Egyptian god of the underworld, Osiris. His legend tells of how he was torn into pieces and later resurrected by bringing them together once again. The font used to generate this image was used with the kind permission of Mark-Jan Nederhof (http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~mjn/). Proforma Name: James Bown College: St John’s College Project Title: Osiris – Secure Social Backup Examination: Computer Science Tripos, Part II Project Date: May 17, 2011 Word Count: 11,841 Project Originator: Malte Schwarzkopf Supervisor: Malte Schwarzkopf Original Aims of the Project To produce a distributed system enabling mutually beneficial peer-to-peer backup between groups of friends. Each user provides storage space on their personal machine for other users to back up their data. In exchange, they have the right to back up their own files onto their friends’ machines. I focus on the challenges of space efficient distribution and fault tolerant retrieval of data. The use of convergent encryption and a strict security policy maintains confidentiality of data. Work Completed All success criteria specified in the proposal have been not only fulfilled, but exceeded. I have implemented a concurrent and distributed peer-to-peer backup system that is able to send, retrieve and remove files from the network, recover from node failure or loss, and provide high security supporting convergent encryption. Finally, I have completed a number of additional extensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Henry Jenkins Convergence Culture Where Old and New Media
    Henry Jenkins Convergence Culture Where Old and New Media Collide n New York University Press • NewYork and London Skenovano pro studijni ucely NEW YORK UNIVERSITY PRESS New York and London www.nyupress. org © 2006 by New York University All rights reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jenkins, Henry, 1958- Convergence culture : where old and new media collide / Henry Jenkins, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-8147-4281-5 (cloth : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 0-8147-4281-5 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Mass media and culture—United States. 2. Popular culture—United States. I. Title. P94.65.U6J46 2006 302.230973—dc22 2006007358 New York University Press books are printed on acid-free paper, and their binding materials are chosen for strength and durability. Manufactured in the United States of America c 15 14 13 12 11 p 10 987654321 Skenovano pro studijni ucely Contents Acknowledgments vii Introduction: "Worship at the Altar of Convergence": A New Paradigm for Understanding Media Change 1 1 Spoiling Survivor: The Anatomy of a Knowledge Community 25 2 Buying into American Idol: How We are Being Sold on Reality TV 59 3 Searching for the Origami Unicorn: The Matrix and Transmedia Storytelling 93 4 Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars? Grassroots Creativity Meets the Media Industry 131 5 Why Heather Can Write: Media Literacy and the Harry Potter Wars 169 6 Photoshop for Democracy: The New Relationship between Politics and Popular Culture 206 Conclusion: Democratizing Television? The Politics of Participation 240 Notes 261 Glossary 279 Index 295 About the Author 308 V Skenovano pro studijni ucely Acknowledgments Writing this book has been an epic journey, helped along by many hands.
    [Show full text]
  • Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew As G
    Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2018 Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew aS g Jake Haskell Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the Civil Procedure Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew Sag &Jake Haskell * ABSTRACT: In this Article, we offer both a legal and a pragmaticframework for defending against copyright trolls. Lawsuits alleging online copyright infringement by John Doe defendants have accounted for roughly half of all copyright casesfiled in the United States over the past threeyears. In the typical case, the plaintiffs claims of infringement rely on a poorly substantiatedform pleading and are targeted indiscriminately at noninfringers as well as infringers. This practice is a subset of the broaderproblem of opportunistic litigation, but it persists due to certain unique features of copyright law and the technical complexity of Internet technology. The plaintiffs bringing these cases target hundreds or thousands of defendants nationwide and seek quick settlements pricedjust low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay rather than to defend the claim, regardless of the claim's merits. We report new empirical data on the continued growth of this form of copyright trolling in the United States. We also undertake a detailed analysis of the legal andfactual underpinnings of these cases. Despite theirunderlying weakness, plaintiffs have exploited information asymmetries, the high cost of federal court litigation, and the extravagant threat of statutory damages for copyright infringement to leverage settlementsfrom the guilty and the innocent alike.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Synthesis
    7 | SYNTHESIS CHAPTER 1. SYNTHESIS This chapter provides the rationale and context for Enquiries into Intellectual Property’s Economic Impact and highlights its most significant findings. In doing so, the chapter presents the major themes of the overall report, which are 1) the importance of various types of intellectual property as sources of growth and innovation in today’s economies; and 2) the effects on IP systems and stakeholders of major developments such as content digitisation, the growth of the Internet, and globalisation. The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities or third party. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law. It should be noted that statistical data on Israeli patents and trademarks are supplied by the patent and trademark offices of the relevant countries. ENQUIRIES INTO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'S ECONOMIC IMPACT © OECD 2015 8 | SYNTHESIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key challenges • Copyright appears to be the type of IP that has been attracting business investment at the highest growth rate and it is undergoing statutory review in many countries, yet there are fewer empirical studies about copyright than about patents. Encouraging and enabling the collection and availability of more data on copyright would facilitate data-driven copyright policy. In fact, robust evidence on the use of IP rights generally and on their economic and social impacts is essential for sound IP systems. Presently, however, relatively little concrete evidence is available to support the common assumption that IP rights encourage greater innovation and creativity.
    [Show full text]
  • A Privacy-Preserving Decentralized Storage with Payments Based on a Blockchain
    A Privacy-preserving Decentralized Storage with Payments Based on a Blockchain Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades Dr. rer. nat. der Fakultat¨ fur¨ Ingenieurwissenschaften, Informatik und Psychologie der Universitat¨ Ulm Henning Johannes Gustav Kopp aus Villingen-Schwenningen 2018 Institut f¨urVerteilte Systeme Universit¨atUlm, Deutschland Amtierender Dekan: Prof. Maurits Ortmanns Gutachter: Prof. Frank Kargl Gutachter: Prof. Frederik Armknecht Tag der Promotion: 20.12.2018 Summary Recently, the paradigm of cloud storage has seen wide acceptance in industry and for personal use. One of its core principles is to outsource storage, such that users can be billed flexibly by their actual demand. However, outsourcing storage such as private data or business secrets leads to privacy problems, as control over the data is lost to the storage provider. This is intensified by the fact that often privacy is considered only as an afterthought in these systems and not integrated into the design from the beginning. Privacy-preserving alternatives to these centralized cloud storage providers are peer-to-peer systems like Freenet or GNUnet. In these systems, participants can donate storage to other users of the system. Privacy plays a vital role in these systems, as, e. g., participants are unable to access data of other users if they are not authorized to do so, even if the data of the other users resides on their own hard disk. However, these decentralized systems suffer from limited contribution due to a lack of incentives to participate. Naively enhancing these systems with the possibility of payments such that storage providers can earn money, infringes privacy, since tracing of payment flows provides links between users and their storage providers.
    [Show full text]
  • Guarding Against Abuse: the Costs of Excessively Long Copyright Terms
    GUARDING AGAINST ABUSE: THE COSTS OF EXCESSIVELY LONG COPYRIGHT TERMS By Derek Khanna* I. INTRODUCTION Copyrights are intended to encourage creative works through the mechanism of a statutorily created1 limited property right, which some prominent think tanks and congressional organizations have referred to as a form of govern- ment regulation.2 Under both economic3 and legal analysis,4 they are recog- * Derek Khanna is a fellow with X-Lab and a technology policy consultant. As a policy consultant he has never worked for any organizations that lobby or with personal stakes in copyright terms, and neither has Derek ever lobbied Congress. He was previously a Yale Law School Information Society Project Fellow. He was featured in Forbes’ 2014 list of top 30 under 30 for law in policy and selected as a top 200 global leader of tomorrow for spear- heading the successful national campaign on cell phone unlocking which led to the enact- ment of copyright reform legislation to legalize phone unlocking. He has spoken at the Con- servative Political Action Conference, South by Southwest, the International Consumer Electronics Show and at several colleges across the country as a paid speaker with the Fed- eralist Society. He also serves as a columnist or contributor to National Review, The Atlan- tic and Forbes. He was previously a professional staff member for the House Republican Study Committee, where he authored the widely read House Republican Study Committee report “Three Myths about Copyright Law.” 1 See Edward C. Walterscheld, Defining the Patent and Copyright Term: Term Limits and the Intellectual Property Clause, 7 J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perfect Way by Anna Bonus Kingsford and Edward Maitland the Perfect Way Or the Finding of Christ
    The Perfect Way by Anna Bonus Kingsford and Edward Maitland The Perfect Way or The Finding of Christ by Anna Bonus Kingsford and Edward Maitland Published in 1888 Boston, Mass.: ESOTERIC PUBLISHING COMPANY, 478 Shawmut Avenue. (Revised and Enlarged Edition.) Page 1 The Perfect Way by Anna Bonus Kingsford and Edward Maitland AUTHORS’ EXPLANATION These lectures were delivered in London, before a private audience, in the months of May, June, and July, 1881. The changes made in this edition calling for indication, are, – the substitution of another Lecture for No. V., and consequent omission of most of the plates; the rewriting, in the whole or part, of paragraphs 6 - 8 and 28 in No. I.; 34 - 36 in No. II.; 5 - 8, 12, 13, 22, 23, 42, 43, 54, and 55, in No. IX. (the latter paragraphs being replaced by a new one); the lengthening of Appendices II, and VI; the addition of a new Part to Appendix XIII. (formerly No. IX); and the substitution of eight new Appendices for Nos:. VII., and VIII. The alterations involve no change or withdrawal of doctrine, but only extension of scope, amplification of statement, or modification of expression. A certain amount of repetition being inseparable from the form adopted, – that of a series of expository lectures, each requiring to be complete in itself, – and the retention of that form being unavoidable, – no attempt has been made to deal with the instances in which repetition occurs. PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION In presenting an American edition of THE PERFECT WAY, or, The Finding of Christ, to the reading and inquiring public, we have been actuated by the conviction that a comprehensive textbook of the “new views,” or the restored wisdom and knowledge of the ages regarding religion or the perfect life, was imperatively required, wherein the subject was treated in a manner luminous, instructive, and entertaining, and which, without abridgement, or inferiority of material or workmanship, could yet be sold at a price that would bring the work within the means of the general public.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 512 of Title 17 a Report of the Register of Copyrights May 2020 United States Copyright Office
    united states copyright office section 512 of title 17 a report of the register of copyrights may 2020 united states copyright office section 512 of title 17 a report of the register of copyrights may 2020 U.S. Copyright Office Section 512 Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The publication of this Report is the final output of several years of effort by the Copyright Office to assist Congress with evaluating ways to update the Copyright Act for the 21st century. The genesis of this Report occurred in the midst of the two years of copyright review hearings held by the House Judiciary Committee that spanned the 113th and 114th Congresses. At the twentieth and final hearing in April 2015, the Copyright Office proposed several policy studies to aid Congress in its further review of the Copyright Act. Two studies already underway at the time were completed after the hearings: Orphan Works and Mass Digitization (2015), which the Office later supplemented with a letter to Congress on the “Mass Digitization Pilot Program” (2017), and The Making Available Right in the United States (2016). Additional studies proposed during the final hearing that were subsequently issued by the Office included: the discussion document Section 108 of Title 17 (2017), Section 1201 of Title 17 (2017), and Authors, Attribution, and Integrity: Examining Moral Rights in the United States (2019). The Office also evaluated how the current copyright system works for visual artists, which resulted in the letter to Congress titled “Copyright and Visual Works: The Legal Landscape of Opportunities and Challenges” (2019). Shortly after the hearings ended, two Senators requested a review of the role of copyright law in everyday consumer products and the Office subsequently published a report, Software-Enabled Computer Products (2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Register of Copyr1ght.S
    SIXTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE REGISTER OF COPYR1GHT.S FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1966 COPYRIGHT OFFICE THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS IL.C. Card No. 10-36017 This report is reprinted from the Annual Report of the Libdnof Congreee for the fiscal year ending June 30,1966 Contents THECOPYRIGHT OFFICE ............................ 1 The Year's Copyright Business ......................... 2 Official publications .............................. 4 Copyright Contributions to the Library of Congress ................ 4 Administrative Developments ........................... 4 Problems of Registrability ........................... 5 Organizational Problems ............................ 5 Notices of Intention To Use ...................... : ... 5 Legislative Developments ............................ 6 Judicial Developments ..............................8 Performing Rights and Community Antenna Systems ............... 8 Rights of Exhibition and Copying ....................... 10 Author's "Moral Right" ........................... 11 Subject Matter of Copyright ......................... 13 Publication ................................. 16 Notice of Copyright ............................. 17 Copyright Registration ............................ 19 Ownership. Assignment. and Renewal of Copyright ............... 21 Infringement and Remedies .........................23 Other Judicial Developments .........................26 International Developments .......................... 28 Tables: International Copyright Relations of the United States as of December
    [Show full text]
  • USTR 2021 Special 301 Report
    2021 Special 301 Report Office of the United States Trade Representative ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is responsible for the preparation of this Report. United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai gratefully acknowledges the contributions of staff to the writing and production of this Report and extends her thanks to partner agencies, including the following Departments and agencies: State; Treasury; Justice; Agriculture; Commerce, including the International Trade Administration and the Patent and Trademark Office; Labor; Health and Human Services, including the Food and Drug Administration; Homeland Security, including Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center; and the United States Agency for International Development. USTR also recognizes the contributions of the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, as well as those of the United States Copyright Office. In preparing the Report, substantial information was solicited from U.S. embassies around the world, from U.S. Government agencies, and from interested stakeholders. The draft of this Report was developed through the Special 301 Subcommittee of the interagency Trade Policy Staff Committee. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 4 SECTION I: Developments in Intellectual Property Rights Protection, Enforcement, and
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy Enhancing Technologies for the Internet III: Ten Years Later
    Privacy Enhancing Technologies for the Internet III: Ten Years Later Ian Goldberg David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science University of Waterloo Waterloo, ON [email protected] 1 Introduction In 1997 with Wagner and Brewer, and again in 2002, we looked at the then-current state of privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) for the Internet. [27, 26] Now, in 2007, we take a third look. Technologies to help users maintain their privacy online are as important today as ever before—if not more so. Identity theft is the fastest-growing crime in the US today [47] and it is all too easy for would-be identity thieves to harvest personal information from the online trails Internet users leave every day. Losses of large databases of personal information are an almost daily occurrence [2]; for example, retailers’ servers are penetrated [44], databases are traded between government and private companies [36] and laptops containing social security numbers are stolen [35]. In 1997, we discussed the dossier effect: all available information about a person gets cross-referenced, and the resulting dossier ends up being used for many purposes, lawful and not. This practice has expanded over the years; the companies that compile and sell these dossiers are known as data brokers. Choicepoint is a prime example—in 2005, this data broker sold dossiers on over 150,000 Americans to a group of criminals. [10] The PETs we discuss here give people a way to control how much of their personal information is revealed when they use the Internet. By controlling the spread of this information, they can limit the size of the data brokers’ dossiers about them.
    [Show full text]