TechPoint Tech Thursday 2/19

Tags

Tomorrow is TechPoint Tech Thursday.

TechPoint in their own words:TechPoint Logo

“Indiana’s premier initiative for growing Indiana’s thriving technology-based economy, TechPoint is known for its ability to identify and empower high-growth Indiana technology companies through education and networking programs, government advocacy and strategic economic development initiatives.

TechPoint represents Indiana’s entire technology community, including publicly-traded companies, private businesses, colleges and research universities, and local economic development organizations. As the preeminent voice for Indiana’s growing technology community, TechPoint is leading a focused and aggressive statewide effort to help transform the state’s technology sector.”

The speaker tomorrow is Jeff Ready,  co-founder of Scale Computing.

Location:

Baker & Daniels LLP, Indianapolis North
600 E. 96th Street, Suite 600
Indianapolis, IN   46240

Time:

5:00 pm – 6:30 pm

Click here for further info and here to register.

Hope to see you there.

Happy Birthday Abraham Lincoln, Inventor-in-Chief

Happy 200th birthday, Honest Abe!  Did you know that President Lincoln, Indiana’s favorite lawyer, was the only president to hold a patent?  On May 22, 1849, Lincoln received Patent No. 6469 for a device to lift boats over shoals.

Lincoln was fascinated by maritime technology and frequently visited the Washington Navy Yard to see the latest weapons and engines.  Lincoln started work on his invention between sessions of Congress in 1848 when, on his way home to Illinois, his boat became stranded on a sandbar.  Click here for the full story.

In 1859, President Lincoln praised the patent laws for having “secured to the inventor, for a limited time, the exclusive use of his invention; and thereby added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius, in the discovery and production of new and useful things.”

Shown below is Lincoln’s scale model which resides at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.  Unfortunately, as with many patents, the invention was never manufactured.

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Boss Products v. Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton

Tags

Boss Products, Inc. v. Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton, Inc.
No: 3:05-CV-293 RM (February 4, 2009)
U.S. District Court, N.D. of Indiana
Before: Chief Judge Miller

For full opinion:
2009 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 8192

TRADEMARKS; LACHES

Opinion (Miller): Plaintiff Boss Products sued defendant Port-A-Pit Bar-B-Que of Edgerton, Ohio (Edgerton) for infringement of registered trademark (PORT-A-PIT) after Edgerton conducted business under PORT-A-PIT for 30 years.  Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that Boss Products inexcusably delayed enforcement of its trademark rights and therefore its recovery should be barred under laches or acquiescence.  The record indicated that Boss Products had knowledge of Edgerton’s use of the mark from the beginning and the 30 years of extreme delay would cause substantial prejudice if Edgerton was forced to rebuild its business under a new name.  Edgerton’s motion for summary judgment was granted.

KLF Legal: Note that the PORT-A-PIT registration (abstract below) was assigned to Boss Products back in December ’04.  Apparently, Boss continued to be unhappy about Edgerton’s use of the mark.  Edgerton relied on the doctrine of “laches,” an equitable defense.  This means that while Edgerton is legally infringing Boss’s trademark, it would be unfair to enforce the law against them.  The person invoking laches (Edgerton) is asserting that the opposing party (Boss) has “slept on its rights”, and that, as a result of this delay, that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim.  3 years might be too long to wait and try to enforce your trademark rights…30 years is definitely too long.

port-a-pit3

port-a-pit2

port-a-pit1

Courtesy of Willamette Law Online

What I’m Reading

On top of all the blogs, law journals, and case updates that I read each day, I also make sure to set aside time to read one Intellectual Property or Tech law book each month.  When I find a book that might be useful for clients, I’ll post a quick review:

Intellectual Property: The Tough New Realities That Could Make or Break Your Business by Paul Goldstein, Stanford Law School.

GoldsteinThe Amazon description:

“The definitive guide to intellectual property for business managers.

How can a product of the mind—an innovation, a song, a logo, a business secret—become the subject of precise property rights? No idea is entirely original; every innovative business borrows, sometimes extensively, from its competitors and others. So how do we draw the line between fair and unfair use?

Billions of dollars ride on that question, as do the fates of publishers, software producers, drug companies, advertising firms, and many others. It’s also a key question for individuals—for instance, if you quit your job after mastering the company’s secrets, what can you do with that information?

With the growth of the internet and global markets, having a smart IP strategy is more essential than ever. Intellectual Property is the ideal book for non-lawyers who deal with patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and copyrights—all essential business issues that have changed rapidly in the last few years.

Every business decision that involves IP is also a legal decision, and every legal decision is also a business decision. Lawyers and managers need to work together to navigate these murky waters, and this book shows how.”

My take:

Paul Goldstein is a frequent author on intellectual property topics.  In fact, he’s written all types of books…fiction novels, treatises, textbooks and “General Interest” works like the book above.  I recall using one of his IP textbooks back in law school.

Intellectual Property: The Tough New Realities That Could Make or Break Your Business provides a nice ground-level view of intellectual property.  Each area of IP law (patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret) is placed into historical context, helping the reader understand the current state of the law and to identify trends for the future.   Goldstein provides the principles and rationales behind our laws, to help the reader understand the ongoing struggle to define the boundaries of IP protection.  The book also details the influence of heavyweight industries (biotech, software/electronics, movie studios and music labels) in expanding and contracting IP law via lobbying and strategic litigation.  Besides being useful to anyone with an interest in basic intellectual property law, this book can also be helpful to experienced IP attorneys in that it can suggest new ways to express complicated IP concepts in layman terms.

“The central lesson of this book is that every decision involving intellectual assets is ultimately a legal decision, and that every legal decision is at bottom a business decision. If intellectual property is economically too important to be left to lawyers, it is also too legally charged to be left to managers.”

 

Indiana Manufacturers send Patent Reform letter to President Obama

Tags

,

Yesterday, over 130 US manufacturing companies sent a letter to President Obama detailing their serious concerns about the economic impact that enactment of patent reform legislation would have on the US economy.  Recognizing that the 111th Congress may be poised to revisit the patent law reforms that the 110th Congress previously abandoned in 2008, the manufacturers took this opportunity to tell the President their side of the patent reform story.  Among the manufacturers were the following four (4) Indiana companies:

Cummins Inc., Columbus, Indiana
DePuy Orthopedics, Warsaw, Indiana
Hill-Rom, Inc., Batesville, Indiana
Zimmer Inc., Warsaw, Indiana

Cummins Logo

DePuy logoZimmer Logo

The letter is a quick and interesting read (click image below for full text). The manufacturing companies emphasize that patent damages should not be reduced.  Rather, they stress that any legislation should be aimed at improving USPTO operations (currently, the patent application backlog is more than 700,000 and the average pendency is more than 32 months).  Taking a pretty obvious jab at the high-tech and financial services industries who aim to benefit from heavy patent reform, the manufacturers argue that “the prosperity of a few companies within two industries should not come at the expense of a larger group of stakeholders.”

I’ve listed below some of the main points that the manufacturing companies include to support their argument that drastic patent reform is unnecessary and perhaps dangerous to our economy:

  • “A recent study focusing on the impact of apportionment legislation estimates that this change alone would put at risk up to 298,000 manufacturing jobs and reduce R&D investment by up to $66 billion.  This would be a negative outcome even when our economy is strong; at a time of economic crisis, it would be tragic.” (Source: The Likely Adverse Effects of An Apportionment-Centric System of Patent Damages, Case Western Study)
  • “The legislation introduced in the 110th Congress dealt with patent issues on the back end rather than the front end, i.e., it attempted to deal with the symptoms of poor patent quality and growing pendency rather than addressing these issues directly. Many of the problems identified by legislative reform proponents as reasons for such reforms are best addressed instead by reforms of USPTO operations.”
  • “[T]here is no explosion in patent litigation.  In 1993, lawsuits were 1.45% of patents granted.  In 2007, lawsuits were 1.48% of patents granted.  The number fluctuates from year to year, but it has never indicated a system out of control.” (Source:  USPTO Annual Reports, Federal Judicial Statistics)
  • “Moreover, there is no explosion in patent damage awards.  Adjusting for inflation, the median annual patent damages award has actually dropped slightly over the last 13 years. In constant dollars, the median was $3.9 million from 1995 through 2000, and $3.8 million from 2001 through 2007.”  (Source: 2008 Patent Litigation Study, PriceWaterhouseCoopers)
Obama Manufacturer Letter

Click for full text