Here is a silly article with a couple amusing trademark attempts I think you might enjoy. However, it also gives you a feel for the variety of claims that people think they can make.
http://www.businessinsider.com/15-ridiculous-trademarking-attempts-2011-4?op=1
“It’s basically the same people doing the same things all over again, only more intensely,” says Brian Reynolds, chief market strategist at Rosenblatt Securities. “In the long term we should be worried.”
This recent WSJ article looks at new companies who are hoping to take people to space. However, how will these American companies compete with Russia and China with regards to any IP issues? Although the article does not discuss IP issues i find it interesting to read the piece and examine how companies may expand to space while still complying with international IP laws.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-giant-lunar-leap-for-private-enterprise-1460070797
Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (U.S. 2014)
Case applying the Mayo two-step test to abstract ideas (rather than just laws of nature). This means the Mayo test applies in the realm of things like software, computer algorithms, etc. The impact of this is that lots of software claims are currently being struck down at the motion to dismiss stage (which means they are being dismissed based on no evidence, just based on judge intuition).
Good article presenting arguments on both sides of the issue.
This article provides an overview of the lawsuit brought by Apply against Samsung for patent infringement. The case will be reviewed by the Supreme Court in its current term. Unfortunately, the Court will not be reviewing one of the more notorious issues: whether ” jurors were wrongly allowed to find Samsung liable for design infringement because its phones, like Apple’s, had rectangular shapes, rounded corners and flat screens with grids of icons.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/point-to-samsung-in-smartphone-patent-war-with-apple/news-story/594c42492c3d54bf0243cb372f879535
The author argues that the quick rate of innovation has made patents, especially for software, obsolete. In particular, he points out that by the time the patent application has been approved (considering the backlog), it has lost its innovative value.
Hi everyone!
Alexis, Alex, and I will be talking about the arguments for and against having a patent system and what that means internationally and at home for our entrepreneurs. In preparation for our presentation, please be thinking about why you think having a patent system is a benefit or detriment to the access of technology and innovation and ways in which the system may be improved and hopefully we will speak to some of your initial reactions in class.
Best,
Ashlie
This article addresses the controversial issue of patenting GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) seeds. Although it initially seems shocking to patent a seed, the article states that the cost of creating a GM crop is $136 million. Supporters argue that biotech companies need theses patents to guard their investment.
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/04/22/patents-and-gmos-should-biotech-companies-turn-innovations-over-to-public-cost-free/
A recent WSJ article tells us that there has been an increase in Venture Capital funding and 2015 saw the highest amount of money raised through VC funding since 2000. The article notes that VC continues to be popular among companies because of the volatile market. Companies can now raise high amounts of capital rather than going public and relying on the secondary resale market.The author notes, “Investors have stayed excited about venture capital because it offers higher growth in a low-return environment.”With the market’s volatility continuing maybe 2016 will see even more VC funding.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/funds-flow-to-venture-firms-1459295426