Library Search

FAQ   Summaries of Law   Dictionary

• The Growth of Canadian Intellectual Property Law and Practice ( June 2005 )
  Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP

  The year 2004 was a noteworthy one in Canadian intellectual property ("IP") litigation, with several developments to report in respect to both law and practice. The majority of IP disputes continue to be litigated within Canada's federal court, which enjoys concurrent jurisdiction with the provincial superior courts over causes of action based on the federal Copyright Act, Patent Act and Trade-marks Act. The federal court is perceived as having superior experience in IP matters. The provincial courts maintain exclusive jurisdiction over causes of action that are founded solely on the common law.

• Court Delivers Bitter Result to Coffee Company in Right of Publicity Case ( March 2005 )
  Howard R. Weingrad and Sara L. Edelman of Davis & Gilbert LLP

  On January 27, 2005, a California jury awarded $15.6 million to a former model whose picture was used without his permission on Taster's Choice coffee product labels. This is an important development for any company dealing with rights and clearances, and serves as an important warning as to the substantial damages a defendant faces if the appropriate permission is not obtained.

• Are Punitive Damages Available Under the Copyright Act ( February 2005 )
  Sara L. Edelman, David S. Greenberg and Marc J. Rachman of Davis & Gilbert LLP

  Given the Copyright Act’s express enumeration of available remedies under the Act and its silence with respect to punitive damages, one would think that a copyright owner is barred from seeking punitive damages when bringing a claim for copyright infringement. Several recent decisions in the Southern District of New York, however, have allowed punitive damages claims to proceed. This article will discuss the traditional view that punitive damages are not available under the Copyright Act, and will explore recent decisions indicating that such damages might be recoverable under certain circumstances. This article will then discuss the implications for both plaintiffs and defendants, and will finally argue that punitive damages should not be available in copyright actions.

• Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004: FindLaw Interview with John Hughes and Jennifer M. Rich of Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP ( September 2004 )
  Jiminy C Twu of FindLaw M V

  John Hughes is a partner at Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP's San Francisco office. His practice focuses upon trademark and copyright law for both domestic and foreign clients. Jennifer M. Rich is an associate at Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP's San Francisco office. Her practice includes trademark and copyright counseling, prosecution, technology licensing, and litigation. They spoke to Jim Twu at FindLaw about the recently introduced Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004.

• LLP: Owner vs. Architect: Who Owns the Design? ( March 2004 )
  Mary Cullen Yeager and Katherine A. Golden of Faegre & Benson LLP

  Both the copyright laws and the AIA Owner-Architect Agreement, B141-1997, provide significant protections to the author of an architectural work. Owners would be wise to negotiate alternative language that provides for the transfer of ownership of the documents and the copyright to the owner, or at least expands upon the license for use provided for in the contract.

• Strategic Considerations In U.S. Copyright Litigation ( November 2003 )
  Margaret C. McHugh and William T. Gallagher of Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP

  Copyrights can be among a company's most valuable intellectual property assets. In order to realize the benefits of these assets, a copyright owner must make intelligent choices as to how best to protect and enforce copyrights against potential infringers. And parties who are accused of copyright infringement need to know the nature and scope of defenses available to them.

• Copyright Term Extension is Constitutional ( May 2003 )
  Janet  Fries and Michael J. Remington of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

  Publishers, film producers, artists, authors, musicians and their heirs, as well as corporate owners of copyrights are applauding the recent decision that the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) is a valid law.

• What is Intellectual Property?: Copyright and the Public Domain ( May 2003 )
  Judith A Silver of Coollawyer.com

  Intellectual Property is the group of legal rights in things that people create or invent. Intellectual property rights include patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret rights. In Europe and some other countries, "moral rights", which are rights of the artist not to have her work greatly altered, are also included.

• Compaq vs. Ergonome, Brown, & Mowrey ( February 2003 )
  Michael  Sutton of Locke Liddell & Sapp LLP

  On April 1, 2002, the Court entered an Amended Final Judgment, in which Compaq (the accused copyright infringer) was awarded $2,765,026.90 in attorney's fees, the largest attorneys fees award ever in a copyright case. It was, however, far from being just a copyright case. It included other claims against Compaq, including unfair competition, misappropriation, unjust enrichment, quantum meruit and fraud, all of which were either dropped by the Defendants before trial or dismissed on summary judgment.

• The Fundamentals of Copyright Law, Publishing Contracts, and Author Representation ( January 2003 )
  Charles A. Armgardt of Modrall Sperling

  This article discusses one of the most important monopoly rights in society today—the right of authors to control, for a limited time, the ability to make and sell copies of certain literary or artistic productions. It also highlights the topics an author should consider when entering a contract for the publication of a work, and finally, the representation of authors by agents and attorneys.