Today's fast-paced business environment requires that all business organizations - regardless of size - understand both that their intellectual properties are among their most valuable assets and that the efficient use of technology is a powerful tool in staying competitive in an ever-changing global marketplace. The successful identification, protection and commercialization of ideas, technologies and information is no easy undertaking and requires highly specialized legal advice.
Our Intellectual Property & Technology group handles a full range of technology and intellectual property matters for our clients, ranging from individual inventors to small businesses to large publicly-held corporations, across a wide spectrum of industries and technologies. Our IP lawyers work closely with clients to help them identify, protect, expand and leverage their technologies and other IP assets in a number of ways. Our proven experience and capabilities include:
This established substantive experience enables us both to assist businesses in protecting their intellectual property rights and also vigorously defend them from charges of violating the intellectual property or proprietary rights of others. Our IP litigators have successfully represented clients in federal and state trial and appellate courts, including the United States Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit, and in proceedings before a wide range of administrative agencies and other forums, including the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, the International Trade Commission and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
Consistent with our firm's innovative approach to problem solving, our IP lawyers work closely with clients and their other advisers in employing a collaborative "team approach" to addressing a client's intellectual property needs. Additionally, our technology and intellectual property engagements often relate to larger business projects or transactions being undertaken by clients, enabling us to utilize other knowledge within our firm's complementary practice groups, including our Emerging Business and Venture Finance Group, our Corporate and Securities Group and our Employment Law Group, to address ancillary issues that are a key part of structuring a successful technology enterprise or other emerging business.
If you operate a mobile app or any other online platform that features consumer reviews, there are important rules you need to know when it comes to procuring, organizing, or editing consumer reviews of your products or services.
The risks are real. Any actions you take that have the effect of distorting or misrepresenting consumer reviews may give rise to allegations of potentially deceptive conduct and enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) under Section 5 of the FTC Act.
As a matter of general guidelines, a few key principles emerge from Section 5 of the FTC Act. Namely, companies (1) should be transparent about their review-related practices and (2) should treat consumer reviews in a way that truly reflects the feedback received from legitimate customers, presenting a true and holistic picture of the consumers’ experiences and interactions with the companies’ goods or services.
While these guiding principles may seem straightforward enough, many companies have engaged in practices that are, in fact, illegal. It’s important to know that, if adopted, these practices can give rise to significant liabilities. This brief article is intended to highlight, and help you avoid, some common pitfalls.
The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that a potential competitor has suffered a “competitive injury” within the meaning of the revised False Marking Statute, 35 U. S.C. § 292, only if it has attempted to enter the relevant market by displaying an intent to enter the market with a reasonable possibility of success and taken action to enter the market.
Following last year’s Supreme Court decision in Alice v. CLS Bank, the United States Patent and Trademark Office continues its struggle for clarity and consistency in establishing patent eligibility for software related patents. Meanwhile, the future of technological innovation hangs in limbo, as patents for software related inventions are being deemed ineligible at an excessive rate.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Commil USA LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc. overturned Federal Circuit precedent allowing defendants to avoid liability for inducing third parties to infringe a patent based on a good-faith belief that the asserted patent is invalid. Noting that infringement and validity are separate issues, the Supreme Court held:
On March 2, 2015, The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC” or “the Court”) addressed directly for the first time whether the offering of a service, without the actual provision of a service, is sufficient to constitute use in commerce under Lanham Act § 45. In deciding that it is not, the Court clarified that a registrant must both (1) offer as well as (2) provide the service at issue. Ultimately the Court affirmed the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) that appellant’s registration was void ab initio.
In a win for Teva Pharmaceuticals, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned the Federal Circuit's long established rule that the patent claim construction rulings of trial courts are not to be accorded any deference upon appeal. On January 20, 2015, the Court held in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. that to the extent these decisions are based on factual findings, such findings should only be overruled upon a showing of clear error. This marks a sizeable shift that should provide a bit more certainty for successful parties on appeal.
The US Patent and Trademark Office submitted a report to Congress outlining the progress and underutilization of virtual patent marking in the three years since it became available under the America Invents Act (AIA). The report was directed at analyzing the effectiveness of “virtual marking” as a viable substitute to the physical marking of articles.
A trademark protects a company’s goodwill and reputation. The owner of a legitimate trademark may prevent others from using a similar mark that is likely to cause confusion among consumers as to the relationship or affiliation of the two entities or their products or services. A company cannot, however, monopolize a generic term under the auspices of trademark law. This concept will be tested in a recently filed matter pending in the Southern District of New York.
The current economic market of low interest rates has sparked a revival of securitization of risky assets. Traditionally, lenders secure loans with tangible assets; however, intellectual property assets are becoming increasingly popular with both lenders and borrowers as a means to close a deal.
Many people are pointing to 3D printing as the next big thing. This has led many others to point to intellectual property issues that will almost certainly become hot button questions in the near future.
With the arrival of accessible 3D printing comes the capacity to alter business and effect social change. Yet, it also raises issues regarding the unauthorized reproduction of products protected by intellectual property laws.
The United States’ patent system has become a popular target for criticism with some claiming that far too many obvious products and methods are being patented, while others contend that the Patent Office is far too restrictive in issuing patents. The only thing that each side can agree on is that the system appears broken. However, fixing the problem to the satisfaction of all will not be easy.
By Victoria Kim, Los Angeles Times, September 15, 2014
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-fish-sauce-20140916-story.html#page=2
Federal trademark trial pits a family-owned industry behemoth against a fledgling maker of artisan fish sauce.
In court, two fish sauce makers recount their personal ties to the staple in Vietnamese cooking.
The world of top-level domain names is about to expand hugely, increasing the risk that your trademark will be used in some form. You will need to be on the alert this summer and fall to be aware of possible problems and be ready to use important new procedures to protect your rights.
Cloud computing is very tempting: cheap and flexible. But it has risks, some of which you can guard against in your SaaS contract.
The key points to address are uptime, service standards, and related remedies and data security.
Trademark owners should be aware that the .xxx domain name will soon be available to the general public for registration on December 6, 2011. Although the .xxx domain name is designed specifically for the adult entertainment industry, trademark owners that are not in the industry can prevent their registered marks from being registered as .xxx domain names during the "Sunrise B" period, which ends on October 28, 2011.
On September 8, 2011, the U.S. Senate passed the House version of the Leahy Smith America Invents Act (H.R. 1249) by margin of 89 to 9. The President will sign the bill into law within the next 10 days. The Leahy Smith America Invents Act is the result of more than ten years of attempts at patent reform and represents the most sweeping change of U.S. Patent laws in over 50 years. The law makes significant changes to a number of areas of the patent law, and brings the U.S.
On Monday, December 7, 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced that it was initiating a program to accelerate the examination of pending patent applications for certain green technologies.
On October 1, 2002, Maryland joined a growing number of states that have enacted laws to limit unsolicited e-mail or so-called “spam.” This new law (Md. Commercial Law Code Ann. § 14-3001 - 14-300) applies to any unsolicited e-mail sent from Maryland or to an e-mail address located in Maryland. A brief summary of the law follows.
Each year the Maryland Legislature enacts a number of laws which impact in various degrees on the personal and business lives of people living in or doing business in the State of Maryland. The General Assembly adjourned on April 8, 2002, and the Session actively concluded when the Governor enacted legislation into State law during four separate signing ceremonies on April 9, April 25, May 6 and May 16.
Baltimore – Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2018. Nineteen of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, including three practices with national Tier 1 rankings: Litigation, Bankruptcy and Real Estate. At the state level, an additional fifty practices have been ranked in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and VA.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2017 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes a record 29 attorneys in 4 states, the District of Columbia and Afghanistan.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that 41 of its attorneys are listed among the 2017 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in Maryland and Kentucky joining the sixteen who were listed earlier this year in Delaware, D.C., Pennsylvania and Virginia.
The 2017 edition of U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP exemplary ratings in its seventh annual rankings of law firms.
Twenty of the firm’s practices were ranked at the national level, as well as thirty-seven in Maryland, ten in Washington, D.C., and two in Roanoke, VA.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that, in addition to ranking the firm highly in its 2016 list of Maryland’s leading firms and business lawyers, Chambers and Partners have added new Whiteford lawyers in Maryland and Delaware.
The practice group rankings are based on the high rankings of 21 individual lawyers.
Fifty-nine lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2016 (copyright 2015 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Maryland, Washington and Virginia offices.
Whiteford Taylor & Preston LLP is very gratified to announce that the firm has once again received exemplary ratings in the fifth annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of law firms.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Managing Intellectual Property has given the firm’s Maryland Intellectual Property practice its highest rating and has singled out six partners for individual recognition in Maryland.
In their commentary, the editors noted that the firm is “highly respected” and that the IP lawyers in the group “handle a split of contentious and non-contentious matters crossing over patent trademark and copyright matters.”
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston lawyers have written a new book titled Intellectual Property for Nonprofit Organizations and Associations, which is now the definitive publication in the field.
Jeff Glassie, Eileen Morgan Johnson, and Dana Lynch, partners with WTP, are co-editors of the new book, published by the American Society of Association Executives and released at the ASAE convention in Dallas, August 11-15, 2012.
Whiteford Taylor & Preston LLP is very gratified to announce that the firm has received exemplary ratings in the second annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of law firms. In Maryland, WTP was rated highly in 34 practice areas, more than any other firm in the state.
The Maryland Chamber of Commerce's State Taxation Consultant Karen T. Syrylo will join the list of presenters for Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP and Watkins, Meegan, Drury & Company LLC's Computer Services Tax Event on Tuesday, March 11, 2008. Held on the eve of Maryland's hearings on measures to revise, limit or repeal the Computer Services Tax from 3:30 to 6:00 p.m. at WTP's offices (7 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore, MD 21202), the event will be moderated by Heather A.
In its four-volume edition evaluating U.S. lawyers, the highly respected European publisher LegalEase has ranked Whiteford, Taylor & Preston’s (WTP) Technology and Intellectual Property section as one of the leading IT practices in the United States. WTP is one of only 18 firms chosen nationwide.
