Tag Archives: patent

ISHTIP at Penn, part 4

Posted on July 23, 2015 by rtushnet

Session 2 | Dina Leytes (Griesing Law, LLC), Moderator   Lord Eldon, Lord Byron, and the Public Domain Gary Dyer (Cleveland State University) Commentator | Simon Stern (University of Toronto)   Byron’s strategies to deal with Eldon’s doctrine that created … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

ISHTIP at Penn, part 3

Posted on July 22, 2015 by rtushnet

Session 1 | Ellen Goodman (Rutgers), Moderator   Access and Development: The History of ‘Development’ and WIPO Sara Bannerman (McMaster University) Commentator | Christopher S. Yoo (University of Pennsylvania) (Yoo presenting Bannerman’s paper, followed by responses from Bannerman)   First, … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

ISHTIP at Penn, part 1

Posted on July 22, 2015 by rtushnet

International Society for the History and Theory of Intellectual Property (ISHTIP) Program 2015   Center for Technology, Innovation, and Competition (Penn Law) and the Cinema Studies Program (Penn Arts and Sciences)   Early Career, Panel 1 | Peter Jaszi (American … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

False patent marking isn’t material to business customers

Posted on June 29, 2015 by rtushnet

Pactiv, LLC v. Multisorb Technologies, Inc., 63 F.Supp.3d 832 (N.D. Ill. 2014)   Pactiv and Multisorb compete to sell oxygen absorbers—“packets of chemicals that react with moisture to absorb oxygen when placed inside food containers,” keeping food fresher longer. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

False patent marking not actionable under Lanham Act

Posted on June 17, 2015 by rtushnet

Leisure Concepts, Inc. v. California Home Spas, Inc., 2015 WL 3658190, No. 14–CV–388 (E.D. Wash. June 12, 2015)   Leisure and CHS compete in spa products, including spa cover lifters.  Leisure’s CoverMate I is protected by a patent, which it … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Apples-to-oranges comparison is literally false, justifies finding of irreparable harm

Posted on June 16, 2015 by rtushnet

Market Track, LLC v. Efficient Collaborative Retail Marketing, LLC, 2015 WL 3637740, No. 14 C 4957 (N.D. Ill. June 11, 2015)   Market Track provides business intelligence services, principally tracking and analyzing information relating to consumer advertising. ECRM is Market … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment