Tag Archives: intellectual property

Wonderful, weird patents

Posted on by

A (silly) post from our student blogger Megan

Hey, readers (aka mom and dad), let’s geek out and talk about strange patents! So it just occurred to me that there are about a bajillion weirdo patents out there and nobody gives them any love. Well, at least most of the big names in the patent world aren’t dedicating their coveted blog space to the outcasts of IP society. I’m here to change this, of course. Brown & Michaels, a nice intellectual property firm nestled in Ithaca, New York, clearly agrees with me because they have a page complete with links to wacky patents on their website (check it out at http://www.bpmlegal.com/weird.html). So sit back, enjoy a beer, bacon, or whatever you normally do when you read my blog, and let’s explore the goofy side of IP.

Hamster vestIf you’re like me, you’ve always dreamed of taking your pets everywhere with you. I know, you’re probably saying that with the pet friendly shopping centers and stores that not only allow dogs inside, but also hand out treats to them, you can already take your pets with you pretty much everywhere you go. But what about your hamster? And what about having your hamster really close, like on your body close, all the time, everywhere. Well, that’s what patent number 5,901,666 allows you to do. Aptly titled, “Pet Display Clothing,” this patented invention allows you to wear a vest with clear tubing attached to the clothing that your pet hamster, Hercules, can chill out in while you’re grocery shopping or catching a flight to Bemidji. Haven’t seen this for sale in stores yet? Well, neither have I. The world just isn’t fair.

DividerEven better than a hamster vest, here’s a fantastic invention that my parents would have been thrilled to have when their three children were much younger: “Portable Automobile Partition.” Patent number 6,260,903, in all its genius, allows mom and dad to place a divider inside the car between their kids. I can still remember a family vacation to Florida when my obnoxious younger brother woke both my older brother and me up from a double-dose of parent-approved-deep-car-sleep. He did this by discreetly yanking locks of our hair and laughing. The pandemonium that ensued after that was like none other: screaming, crying, kicking… You name it…we were that family. My poor parents, they still haven’t had more than five minutes of peace and quiet since Reagan was elected the first time. But man, I guarantee if this were on the market back in the 80’s my parents would not have thought that this was an odd patent, to the contrary, they would have thought this was an invention worth buying as many shares of stock in as they could have afforded.

deodorizerLast, but certainly not least, I’ll be me, you be you, just play along:  Me: knock knock!  You:  Who’s there? Me: Orange! You: Orange who? Me: Orange you glad I just set up a patent related to flatulence with a knock knock joke?! Insert laughing emoji. Yes, that just happened. Well, I had to break the ice somehow, or should I say I had to break the wind? Ha. Ha. But seriously, US 6313371 B1 is all about cutting the cheese. Ok, ok, I’ll stop but “Flatulence Deodorizer” consists of “a pad to be worn by a user for absorbing gas due to flatulence. The pad is constructed of activated charcoal cloth disposed between a pair of laminations or layers having multiple perforations therein. The method of use of the present invention is also simple. The pad is non-intrusively taped inside briefs or panties.” Now c’mon…we all know a person that we would give this to at some point…just sayin.’

ear protectorI think by now you get my point, patents are cool. Patent law is neat. Patents can save lives. Underlying technology can be incredibly useful, profitable, and practical. But there is another darker, more rogue side to intellectual property: the outsiders, the Slim Shadies and Pony-boy Curtises of patents, if you will. But don’t discount these bad boys, give them a chance. Read them, laugh at them, but whatever you do, don’t turn your back on them because it’s the pariahs like “Animal Ear Protectors” (US 4233942) that make patent law totally awesome, dude.

Victoria***This blog is dedicated to my friend and inspiration, Victoria R. Zellmer, PhD. Candidate at the University of Notre Dame, who is working tirelessly in the Harper Cancer Research Institute to cure cancer. Science and law are cool, yo!  Rock on girl!

Forever Irish

Posted on by

MSPL at GSVA post from our student blogger Catie

So, here we are at the end of MSPL Boot Camp…

No, wait, I’ve completed the program and I’m graduating in less than a week! I know that it’s cliché, but where did the last 9 months go? Many of us came into the program without really knowing what we were getting ourselves into with this whole ‘patent law’ stuff, but now we’re prepared and excited for the beginning of our careers in a field that we have become engaged in. I came into the program with a weak understanding of what a patent practitioner does and I had a few misconceptions about what their day-to-day lifestyle is like in law firm and in-house settings. Although I still have plenty to learn, I feel like this program has prepared me for whatever tasks and circumstance my first few years will throw at me.

I’ve learned plenty about myself, too. That’s tacky, I know, but I really have. A year ago, as a brand-new college graduate, I enrolled into the MSPL with a vague, narrow-minded vision of what my future would be like. I was really anxious with the ambiguity of everything ahead of me, including the program itself. At this point, I still don’t necessarily know what I’ll be doing a few months from now. Believe it or not, I’m actually not too worried about it. I’ve learned that the potential of work that I could do within patent law is much broader than I expected. I’m not limited to my niche formed by my biology degree. As a matter of fact, this semester, I have been working at an internship where I have had the opportunity to work on technology in mechanical engineering, and it’s been fantastic! I’m really excited about the prospects of working with a broad array of novel technologies in my career. It was not what I had originally anticipated when I thought of myself as a patent agent, but my initial expectations have been exceeded!

I’m also excited about the possibilities of my future. There are many potential opportunities for employment, and I could still opt to further my education, whether that be law school or another higher degree. I still have hopes of someday getting a Master’s degree in genetic counseling, but for now, I want to focus on establishing myself in patent law. If I have learned anything from others in the program (from whom I’ve learned a lot), it’s that there is plenty of time to figure everything out. As one of the babies of the group, I was incredibly lucky to have my friends in the program talk to me about their backgrounds and experiences that have led to the knowledge that they have acquired along their paths. There is a lot of pressure as a soon-to-be or recent graduate to have a job and a rock-solid plan for your future. It’s almost assumed that you’re supposed to have the rest of your life paved out at 22 once you have a college diploma. Everyone in the program showed me that it’s okay to be a highly educated individual who is still trying to carve out a career, or someone who has already worked a professional job and wants to take a different path, or someone who still doesn’t know “what they want to do when they grow up”.

Speaking of the other MSPL’ers, I’m really going to miss the patent law family! We all hit it off from day one, and it led to wonderful friendships over our short year together. As much as I’m excited for the next chapter of my life, I’m sad to be leaving our little circle of friends and Notre Dame. I have to say: Notre Dame most definitely lives up to the hype! It really is a special place, and I consider myself so blessed to have had the experience of becoming part of the Fighting Irish! For that, I have my parents to thank! Attending Notre Dame and being part of the MSPL has majorly exceeded any expectations I had a year ago, and I will be forever grateful for this experience and those who made it happen.

I am now ready and excited for what my future holds, and I am reciprocally so excited to see my patent law family succeed! We have a great bond in a close-knit field, and we will from here on out be part of the great Notre Dame community. Thank you if you have taken the time to read up on any of the knowledge and experiences acquired by the MSPL bloggers; they are representative of our unique journeys through the program, and we appreciate any time that you took to read our thoughts! I am genuinely so happy and thankful to have been a member of this group of MSPL students. Within a short 9 months, Notre Dame became a new home to me, and I can easily say that enrolling in the MSPL was the best decision I could’ve made. “And our hearts forever, love thee Notre Dame!”

Catie Stevens
cmstevens8@outlook.com
LinkedIn

The Markman Hearing

Posted on by

A post from our student blogger Megan

The MSPL just participated in a mock Markman Hearing last week. The shorthand term “Markman Hearing” refers to a United States Supreme Court case, Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996). This case hinged on whether claim construction was a job for a judge or a jury. The holding decidedly provided that claim construction is to be determined by the finder of law, or a judge. Finders of fact, or juries, however, are guaranteed through the 7th Amendment in patent infringement cases which are totally separate proceedings.

Markman Hearings differ from infringement trials, though. The purpose of a Markman Hearing is to decipher what the claim terms of a patent mean. If you recall from some of my earlier blogs I discussed that claims are the legally enforceable portion of a patent. Claims essentially describe the invention that is to receive patent protection. And just because you receive a patent doesn’t mean that you are finished with the legal system with regard to that invention. Depending on the patent and the parties involved, your patent may become the subject of heavy litigation at some point. This litigation will likely stem back to the claims of your patent. If your claims are unclear another party may infringe, or unlawfully make, use, sell, or import your invention. This gives you reason to sue for infringement.

For our Markman Hearing the MSPL was given a set of children’s connector toys. If you were born in the eighties or nineties you remember Tinkertoys and K’nex®. We were given a larger version of these as the subject products in question for our hearing. This brought back some great memories for me because my grandmother had a set of giant Tinkertoys that she hid in obscure places in her home in Iowa. She hated to clean the mess we made after playing with these toys and knew that my brothers and I would never clean up after ourselves, so we had to sneak the set out of her basement when she wasn’t looking. This got a lot of nervous giggles out of us but when she’d discovered what we’d done, she would laugh, too. Who knew that years later I would be trying to interpret the claim construction of the patent drafted to protect this childhood memory of mine?!

During the hearing, the MSPL was split into two groups: one group became the plaintiffs and the other group became the defendants. The plaintiffs accused my group—the defendants—of infringing their product by making some connector toys almost identical to their toys. Just as in a real Markman Hearing, both sides met to discuss what claim terms they agreed were ambiguous and needed to be argued. Both groups met outside class to formulate arguments and draft briefs to the Court. A hearing was scheduled to argue the meaning of the ambiguous claim terms and the briefs were submitted to the judges—our professors.

The day of the hearing the defendants knew that they were in trouble as soon as one of our judges/professors, Tom Mauch, saw the infringing product and proclaimed, “defendants, you’re toast.” As you can see, this mock Markman Hearing was more laidback than an official courtroom setting; however, it was conducted very close to the procedure of an actual hearing. Both sides were given time to present their arguments as well as ten minutes of rebuttal.

This mock experience taught us a lot of valuable, practical information. First, we need to be careful how we initially draft claims—if your claims are unclear you put your client at risk for litigation at a later time. Second, develop your argument but also think about what your opponent’s argument is going to be so you can anticipate and craft a formidable rebuttal. Finally, claim drafting and claim interpretation are learned skills. It takes effort and practice to become proficient at these things, allow time to develop this ability.

The Markman Hearing symbolizes the endpoint with respect to the obligations that we had to meet for our capstone requirement in the MSPL. It is with bittersweet excitement that I write this blog on a rainy Saturday afternoon in late April. Our time in the MSPL has almost come to an end but as I finish this eighteenth blog I am reminded of a quote that I will leave you with: “every end is a new beginning.”

The patent process from start to finish

Posted on by

Patent ProcessA post from our student blogger Megan

I get a lot of questions about how the patent process works. Because I think the patent process can seem a little daunting, I thought I’d give you a quick rundown of how it works from start to finish. Please note that this is just a general view of the process and how it works—each patent application is different and therefore the process is unique for each as well. In addition, while you may proceed pro se (without the help of a patent attorney or agent), it is highly recommended that you enlist the guidance of a patent practitioner when seeking patent protection.

Where do you begin when you want a patent? Well, first, you’ll want to know that this is not an extremely fast process. So how long does it take to get a patent? In true lawyer fashion, I have to tell you that it just depends. If you have a complex underlying technology then it could take years. Some dates that you will want to remember are that your application will publish eighteen months from filing and if you file a placeholder application, you will need to replace this with a real application within twelve months. Ok, so you can kind of see where this is going… patent law is complicated so you’ve got to know your dates and prepare accordingly.

Let’s swing back to the original question, though: where do you start when you want to get a patent. You need to figure out if your idea has already been acted on. In other words, you need to do a patentability search to determine if there are other patents, offers for sale, publications, patent applications, or anything else that has already discloses your idea. You will want to do this because if your idea is already within the public domain you will likely be prevented from receiving a patent. Remember, you cannot patent something that isn’t original.

Once you’ve performed a patentability search you will want to draft a patent application. Your application will have to comply with various statutes. For instance, the concept that you reveal in your application will need to be new and non-obvious. You will have to describe how to make and use your technology so a person who works in your technology area will be able to reproduce it. Careful planning and drafting are a must at this stage in the game. It is essential that you understand how to draft an application if you want the process to proceed as smoothly as possible. Drafting a patent application is both an art and a science. Patent agents and attorneys are trained to specialize in this.

If you choose to submit your application to the United State Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), you will enter a phase called “prosecution.” Remember that this is patent prosecution, not a criminal prosecution—these two things are different. Patent prosecution involves sending your patent application to a person who reviews applications in a specified area of technology at the USPTO. You will likely encounter what are called “rejections” from your examiner. Don’t stress, this is a common occurrence. Patent prosecution involves going back and forth with the examiner until you get the application drafted in a proper form that the examiner accepts.

If the examiner sends you a “notice of allowance,” congratulations, you just snagged a patent on your inventive idea. If your examiner denies you at least two times through rejections, you have the option to appeal this decision. Appeal is an interesting court procedure that I won’t delve into it in this blog, but know that it is an alternative if you are struggling to get a patent grant.

This was a quick look at the patent process. Please note that it is far more complicated in real life. But as the saying goes, it may not be easy but it will be worth it. So, happy patenting!

Pedal to the Metal

Posted on by

A post from our student blogger Roberto

As you likely know by now students in the MSPL have been working long and hard all year on their individual capstone projects.  These projects are writing patent applications on various technologies for researchers at Notre Dame.  At the conclusion of first semester the students each gave a lengthy presentation to a panel comprised of their inventors, Dr. Deak who is the director of the MSPL, and the representative from the Office of Technology Transfer at Notre Dame who is assigned to their technology.  In this first presentation the students worked to explain and demonstrate their understanding of the technology as well as presenting a preliminary set of claims they had forged to protect this technology.  This semester, students have worked with professional mentors to perfect their claims and round out many of the sections of the patent application document.  This document served as the MSPL thesis and was recently submitted by all the students who intend to graduate this coming May.  After submitting their thesis, students also have to give a second presentation to the same panel.  This time the students present on the work they did this semester and explain the bulk of the patent application they have crafted.  The second presentation wraps up all the work the student has done and allows the Office of Technology Transfer to take the project on from that point.

A few months ago I sat down and looked at my schedule and decided that I was going to take the USPTO patent bar exam at the end of March.  At the time, I wrote off the effect of the compounding thesis requirements on top of studying for the bar exam using the PLI review materials.  A few short days after turning in my thesis and giving my thesis defense I took and passed the patent bar exam.  It was a crazy but extremely rewarding feeling knowing that I had attained my three main academic goals for the semester and that now I could focus on finishing out my year strong and getting ready for my next challenges.  The MSPL program put me in a fantastic position to succeed on exam day and prepared me well for the variety of questions that were asked.  Our work in the MSPL gave me real life experience that was invaluable and made the entire process much easier.  That being said, the MSPL’s focus is not solely on preparing students for the patent bar and therefore it was necessary to fully exploit the wealth of PLI study materials we have access to.  After taking many practice tests I was ready to go and hit the ground running.

Fisker Thunderbolt (top) and Aston Martin One-77 (Bottom) (Photo courtesy of Car and Driver)

Fisker Thunderbolt (top) and Aston Martin One-77 (Bottom) (Photo courtesy of Car and Driver)

Now, for the fun part of this post.  One thing you probably don’t know about me is that I love cars.  When I’m at home it’s hard to find a weekend where I don’t find myself tearing something apart or putting something back together.  For example, over Easter break my father and I replaced the radiator on a car and schemed as to the next parts we were going to buy and install.  This past week there were some major developments in the auto industry that had intellectual property undertones.  First, one of the most acclaimed contemporary automobile designers, Henrik Fisker, has been accused of copying a design of his former employer, Aston Martin.  Fisker, who now is a founding partner and executive chairman of Fisker Automobiles, recently debuted a “design study” named the Thunderbolt which shares a striking resemblance to the infamous Aston Martin One-77.  Initially, Fisker approached Aston Martin about producing the Thunderbolt and received staunch resistance but he decided to continue on his intended path regardless.  Aston has said that after this initial approach, the conversation had left them believing that Fisker would drop the Thunderbolt concept in an effort to avoid any potential issues.  That all changed when Fisker himself showed up at the Amelia Island Concours d’Elegance, which is the premier automobile charity event in the world, in the none other but the Thunderbolt.  The response from Aston was swift and a legal team soon filed a lawsuit against Fisker in California on multiple counts of trademark infringement.  In particular, Aston alleges that the Thunderbolt contains confusingly similar grille and side vent designs compared to its trademarked designs. Most people believe this to be an attempt by the fledgling Fisker to make off with the high class brand and image Aston Martin has worked so hard to establish.

Lincoln Continental Concept (Top) and Bentley Flying Spur (Bottom) (Photo courtesy of Autonews)

Lincoln Continental Concept (Top) and Bentley Flying Spur (Bottom) (Photo courtesy of Autonews)

In a strikingly similar case, Bentley finds itself contemplating potential legal action after the 2016 Lincoln Continental concept was unveiled at the New York auto show.  Much like the Aston-Fisker case, Bentley is upset because Lincoln is attempting to unfairly profit from the brand image Bentley has worked hard to attain.  As you can see from the images, several key aspects of the Bentley are present in the Lincoln and serve to confuse the buyer as to the product they are actually viewing.  By most estimates, the 2016 Lincoln Continental, should it become a production car, would retail in the $60,000 range which is only a fraction of the over $200,000 base price of the 2014 Bentley Flying Spur.  Perhaps the most fascinating aspect of this case is the reaction of Bentley head designer Luc Donckerwolke (who is also the man responsible for the stunning Lamborghini Murciélago) who said; “Somebody asked me if I wanted to sue. I said, ‘No! I don’t want to sue. I don’t care about that. My issue is about respect for the car-design process.’ If we start copying each other, then this is a negative for the design culture.”  In today’s global rip-off culture it is refreshing to hear such a prominent figure speaking out against acts which are all too often considered common place.  It will be interesting to see how Bentley proceeds and if they take notes during the pending legal case between Aston Martin and Fisker.  It is often said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but I’d be willing to bet that recent events have left Bentley and Aston Martin less than impressed.

What’s a disclosure?

Posted on by

A post from our student blogger Catie

Maybe you have this fantastic idea in your head for a new invention, and you already did a little digging around on your own to see if your idea already exists. You scoured the internet and maybe did your own Google Patent search. From what you can tell, no one else has ever patented or sold your invention! You take your napkin sketches to a company that owns a bunch of patents in the field of your invention. You show them your sketches, explain the technology behind your invention, and give a great sales pitch on why this invention would benefit the public. Unfortunately, they look fairly unimpressed, and they quite distractedly tell you that they’ll get back to you when they can. Months go by, and you don’t hear back from them. You may have been putting in hours to reduce your invention to practice, meaning you work to create a real product out of your idea. You tell yourself that you’ll try again, but then you get distracted by school or work. A few years later, you see a commercial for your product, produced by the company to whom you originally showed your sketches. You go searching again and find that they patented YOUR idea! What can you do??

Unfortunately, there may not be anything that you can do about it. Situations like this one and ones that are more nuanced happen all the time, and this is why your patent agent or attorney may pester you with tons of questions regarding any “disclosure” you may have made. A disclosure is basically any description or demonstration of your idea to be patented that is discoverable to the public before you filed any patent application. Disclosure can be an elusive topic, as it is not always as blatant as running out to show your napkin drawings or lab data to a third party. Sometimes, it can be as simple as having a phone conversation about the technology when someone nearby overheard it, or presenting your data in the form of an oral presentation or poster to colleagues when a guest happened to stop by and overhear your idea. Public disclosure is not always a cut-and-dry event, which is all the more reason why the inventor should guard his or her idea carefully to prevent others from knowing about the technology until a patent application is filed.

The scenario described previously is a loss for the true first inventor of the technology because there is a ‘First Inventor to File’ (FITF) system in place. This means that whoever files a patent application on a certain invention first and can show that he or she has reasonable mastery over the technology of the invention will be granted the exclusive rights of a patent. In this case, the company definitely stole your invention, but they filed an application first and likely harnessed an understanding of how to make the invention function correctly. This is not to say that the FITF system is bad; it is just in the best interest of inventors to take certain precautions to protect their IP.

There are a few scenarios where you could have prevented this from happening. Firstly, it is important to keep thorough notes over your idea and always date them. That way, you possess proof that you had ownership of the idea first. Secondly, as suggested previously, avoid disclosing your technology as much as you can. No one can find out about your invention and steal it if you never tell anyone about it! Although, if you must make a disclosure, you may want to consider filing a provisional (similar to a placeholder) application or implementing a confidentiality agreement before disclosing. In this way, you are protecting your IP and claiming it as your own before others can experiment with it for themselves. Even if you don’t take this route, you can still claim rights to your idea as long as you file a provisional or non-provisional (actual patent application) within one year of your disclosure date. However, the clock will be ticking and you can never be sure who is trying to patent the same idea. Therefore: go forth, keep inventing, and don’t tell anyone about it until you have a provisional!

The patent application

Posted on by
http://www.toonpool.com/cartoons/Vanilla%20Ice%20Patent_145365

http://www.toonpool.com/cartoons/Vanilla%20Ice%20Patent_145365

A post from our student blogger Megan

Three words: patent application drafting. This is what the MSPL is immersed in as of right now. Our graduate thesis consists of drafting a patent application which is due on April 1. Drafting a patent application is a true art form and more in-depth than its moniker suggests. It is not simply an “application” that one fills in information into prepared blanks. In fact, patent application drafting requires serious skill and thought into the future. Most of what goes into a patent application is very calculated language and terminology, with careful consideration of what types of language could be litigated on at a later time.

One interesting aspect of the patent application is that there are rules that accompany each part of the application. There is even a rule for the title which states that: it must be 500 characters or less and the words ‘“new,” “improved,” “improvement of,” and “improvement in” are not considered as part of the title of an invention, these words should not be included at the beginning of the title of the invention and will be deleted when the Office enters the title into the Office’s computer records, and when any patent issues. Similarly, the articles “a,” “an,” and “the” should not be included as the first words of the title of the invention and will be deleted when the Office enters the title into the Office’s computer records, and when any patent issues.”’ This rule for invention titles is actually very short and understandable compared to the other rules for each part of the patent application.

Combine the pressure of submitting a patent application within a specific deadline (timing is everything in the patent world—if you miss a date your client can be enormously hindered) and the rapidly, seemingly never-ending evolving design of cutting-edge inventions, and you have the perfect storm of quiet chaos. My desk is stacked with notes from inventors, red-inked application drafts, and sticky notes with simple reminders to look up a rule of law. I work day in and day out on the application but somehow each new day brings a new challenge: this document is truly living and breathing, it changes each time the inventors email with a new drawing or ask about adding a detail that they hadn’t considered before.

Be forewarned: patent application drafting is not for the faint at heart. I joke, but in all honesty, while drafting my first patent application has admittedly been a struggle, it has also deepened my appreciation for the agents and attorneys that draft applications on a daily basis. These professionals walk a thin line between fully describing the underlying invention, and avoiding costly litigation blunders that may crop up sometime in the future. This requires the utmost in scientific and engineering comprehension, along with a deep-seated legal knowledge of rules.

The enjoyment in drafting the application has been in translating science and engineering principals into legal language. We are seeing the finished product after months of careful planning and understanding another person’s detailed creation. I am eternally grateful to the Notre Dame inventors I got to work with to draft my first patent application; I learned a ton and the experience was one-of-a-kind. I’d like to make this blog entry longer but please, excuse me, I have to get back to this application!

The MSPL takes on DC

Posted on by

A post from our student blogger Catie

MSPL students pose for a picture in front of the White House before going in for a tour

MSPL students pose for a picture in front of the White House before going in for a tour

To continue our whirlwind of a spring semester, a small group of MSPL students spent our spring break in D.C., exactly one month after our excursion to San Francisco. I know that it’s hard to believe that a trip anywhere could live up to a visit to sunny California, but D.C. was absolutely amazing! We were lucky enough to experience beautiful weather in the nation’s capital, as we mostly took the metro and traveled on foot to explore the area. The experience was four days packed with law firm and professional visits, informative and fun site seeing, and sampling of some of the area’s unique restaurants!

Similar to our agenda in California, we had the opportunity to visit a few law firms and D.C. area organizations that each houses at least a small cohort of IP professionals. With each visit, the MSPL’ers held candid conversations with these patent agents and attorneys to gain a solid understanding of what a career in patent law is like. We definitely learned something new at each location, and it was really awesome to be exposed to so many new concepts of intellectual property in such a short amount of time!

It was also fascinating to observe the personality dynamics of each firm or organization. A point that has frequently been reiterated to the MSPL is that as we begin our job search, it is important that we are not only determining where we would like to work, but also in what kind of environment we would like to work. It has been described that interviewing for a job is much like dating: it is critical to assess whether or not you like the given set of employers and would enjoy working with them just as much as they are assessing you in the same way. With such a small group of MSPL students, we also had the opportunity to speak with the IP professionals more casually and talk more about ourselves and our backstories. We made really great connections, and this helped to break down the serious and stiff demeanor that the East Coast was made out to have (prior to the trip, of course). This enhanced our experience all the more, to the point where the MSPL’ers had a really difficult time pinpointing our favorite visit by the end of the trip!

We also took the time to do some site-seeing. On the first day, we visited the USPTO and saw an examiner’s office up close as well as visited the patent drop-off window! Between professional visits on the first day, we stopped by the National Archives, where we saw the Magna Carta, the U.S. Constitution (including the clause of Article One that authorizes patent law!), and a few of the earliest granted U.S. patents. The next day, we had the privilege of touring the White House, the Capitol Building, and the Supreme Court, where we had the exciting opportunity to actually go inside the courtroom! On one stormy, foggy night, we took the opportunity to make the trek around the Lincoln Memorial, the National World War II Memorial, the Washington Monument, and then circled back around to walk past the White House before heading back to the hotel. On top of the magnificent site-seeing that we did, we also ate at some fantastic D.C. eateries, where we dined on specialty pizza and fresh seafood, and even had the experience of eating at the Old Ebbitt Grill!

My description of the trip is clearly incomplete without mentioning the wonderful family-bonding that we had on the trip! Although we only had a small sub-set of the MSPL in attendance, we still had tons of fun spending time together and exploring the area. From terrible direction-giving to cramming inside of taxis together, we had a great time and many laughs along the way. We even topped off our trip by passing the time on the drive home with an in-depth exploration of music and sharing of all of our favorite genres! If it isn’t already obvious, it was a truly fantastic trip. It was a spring break well spent, and I am incredibly happy that I made the decision to go!

The intellectual property story of Legos

Posted on by
Figure 1: Comparison of Mega Bloks (Top) and Legos (Bottom). (Courtesy of Wikipedia)

Figure 1: Comparison of Mega Bloks (Top) and Legos (Bottom). (Courtesy of Wikipedia)

A post from our student blogger Roberto

As a kid, I could usually be found playing ball in the yard with my brother until the sun went down.  When we were forced to be inside, either by the lack of sunlight or good weather, my brother and I would always find something fun to do.  Many times I would find myself with screwdriver and hammer in hand, plotting how to take something apart in order to figure out how it worked.  As you may be able to guess, this led to the absolute destruction of many valuable items, including a watch which was my mother’s wedding gift to my father.  Shockingly, my parents were in desperate need of a new way for me to get my early engineering fix and began investing in Legos.  Like any aspiring engineer, I spent days on end constructing the coolest hydrogen-powered intergalactic star destroyers and subterranean exploratory vehicles.  Pretty soon I was bringing my creations to family gatherings showing them off like blue ribbon cattle at the state fair.  Before long my amazing family contributed to the cause by routinely giving me Legos on birthdays and at Christmases.  I remember one year getting a set of Mega Bloks and initially not even realizing the difference.  For those who do not know, Mega Bloks are a direct competitor to Lego’s interlocking brick platform and often times can even be used interchangeably with Legos.  After using these new Mega Bloks with my old Legos I soon realized the truth; the Mega Bloks were simply not as nice as the Legos I had come to know and love.  These Mega Bloks looked and worked like Legos but were not made to the same quality.  Rather than precisely locking together like Legos, Mega Bloks were flimsy and never really fit well together often leading to weak structures that fell apart.  In contrast, my Lego creations were so rigid that they needed to be pried apart and often doubled as formidable defense measures against an unexpected onslaught by my brother.

So why am I spending all this time talking about Legos?  Well, while reminiscing about my childhood over our recent spring break I remembered my love for the little plastic blocks.  After I thought about them for a while I asked myself two things.  First, where the heck were they, I needed to find them and relive all these awesome memories.  And second, I wondered what kind of crazy intellectual property issues Legos ran into.  After doing some research I found out that the Danish company started selling toys in 1932 and introduced the first of their famous bricks in 1958.  As you may be able to guess, many of Lego’s patents have since expired with the last major one expiring in 1978.

Mega Bloks first entered direct competition with Legos in 1991 and has been involved in about a dozen lawsuits with Lego since then, many of which are still active.  The natural question now is, how did Mega Bloks’ activity after Lego’s patent expirations result in a lawsuit?  Well, after running out of patent protection Lego’s savvy legal team turned to copyright and trademark protection.  In particular, Lego has tried to protect the visual appearance of its standard brick with eight studs through trademark protection.  In 2005, Lego sued Mega Bloks for trademark violation in Canada and lost and after that, Lego brought a similar suit against Mega Bloks in Europe and lost again.  As it stands right now, Lego is currently grasping at straws to protect its intellectual property and facing the possibility of little real protection.

Figure 2: Image of "Lego Friends" Comparison (Courtesy of Cato).

Figure 2: Image of “Lego Friends” Comparison (Courtesy of Cato).

While many of the cases surrounding Lego’s trademark of a block with studs have been settled Lego is now going after competitors for making products similar to their new “Lego Friends” products.  Lego has recently filed a complaint to the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) against several companies to bar importation of several products similar to their “Lego Friends” products on the basis of copyright infringement.  The ITC’s intellectual property powers originate from their responsibility to protect domestic industries from “unfair competition”.  The key issue here is that Lego is a Danish company which manufactures its products in Europe and Mexico.  This may disqualify them from standing as a “domestic industry” and therefore they may not subject to the ITC’s protection.

What presents an even more interesting situation for Lego is the advent of 3D-printing technology.  As you may know, 3D-printers are becoming less expensive and are beginning to offer more capabilities.  In the coming years as 3D-printers become common place it will be impossible for Lego to prevent others from printing their own bricks.  In fact, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University recently created an online library of pieces which can be printed by anyone with a 3D-printer.  It is not out of the realm of possibility that 3D printers will dramatically impact sales of products like Legos which are largely uniform and easy to print.  As the cost of 3D-printers and supplies continue to decrease, at what point will Legos become simply too costly?  These issues are surely being considered by the company and it will be exciting to see how they adapt.  Before long Legos may no longer be bought at the store, but downloaded online and printed at your desk.

Other kinds of Intellectual Property?!

Posted on by

By definition, the MSPL focuses on teaching our students about patents. How to get them, how to talk to people about them, what they’re good for (or not). But sometimes it’s important to step back and get some perspective.

In our Ethics class, our students will spend the first three weeks of the semester learning about the other kinds of Intellectual Property that are common in the United States: trade/service marks, copyright, trade secrets, and trade dress. (In other countries, traditional knowledge is also considered a type of IP, but we don’t cover TK in our curriculum.)

The point of having our students learn about these other kinds of IP is quite practical: clients have problems; and most clients have more than one type of problem. So, it’s almost certain that, at some point, every patent agent is going to see a TM or (c) and need to know what that means. … and whether or not s/he can provide legal advice to the person who’s asking a question (hint: NO!).

I teach these classes, and even though they’re out of my area of specialty, I really enjoy them. This year the Robin Thicke/Marvin Gaye lawsuit over “Blurred Lines” is going to provide us with some fun subject matter when we talk about copyright. And, my favorite Diet Coke will make a special appearance as a teaching prop!