Slashdot Mirror


Biggest IP cases of 2002

scubacuda writes "Law.com's article, The Biggest IP Cases of 2002, has a nice summary of some of the intellectual property cases that have caught our attention this last year. Of particular interest to slashdotters: Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. (regarding Arriba's visual search engine), Enzo Biochem Inc. v. Gen-Probe Inc. (regarding a gene patent being invalid because it did not meet the written description requirement), an Illinois federal court injunction against Aimster, United States v. Elcom Ltd a/k/a Elcomsoft Co. Ltd. , and Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Welles (regarding Playmate of the Year, Terri Welles, using Playboy's marks and metatags on her website)."

3 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Eldred etc.; and a contest by MacAndrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Eldred is a very interesting case. I'm optimistic the retroactive portion of the law stands a 50:50 chance of being struck down, despite the Court's conservatism and traditional deference to Congress in similar matters. As for prospective copyright terms, I really doubt the court will intervene, because the life+70/95 terms are not obviously unreasonable, esp. when compared to law in other countries -- even if they do seem a tad long as a matter of judgment.

    EFF has done a nice job collecting legal materials as its website, useful as a reference even if one disagrees with their position.

    What to make some money while testing your legal and psychic prowess? Try this contest.

  2. Legal Systems by handy_vandal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    (1) The best argument doesn't always win. Sometimes the lawyer who wins is the one who gets the ideologically sympathetic judge.

    Worse: in some systems, the lawyer who wins is the one who makes the biggest payoff to the judge ... or makes the most persuasive case that the judge's life hangs in the balance. Maybe these things don't happen (much) in America, but they do happen around the world (e.g. Colombia vs. Medellin cartel) and throughout history (e.g. late Roman republic).

    (2) What makes lawyers so deserving of Big Money? A living wage, sure ... but Big Money? To my thinking, it's teachers and garbage collectors who deserve the Big Money -- try running a civilzation without those professions, see how ugly things get real quick.

    Of course, some lawyers work pro bono for the causes in which they believe. That's not good capitalism, but it's truly heroic.

    That said, I agree with your point: better a free market legal system than a bloated bureaucracy.

    --
    -kgj
  3. Re:Eldred etc.; and a contest by MacAndrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yep. There are two arguments in the quoted passage: First, that Congress has abused the meaning of "limited time"; second, that retroactive extensions of "existing terms" are prohibited. I'm sympathetic to the second, and think the first is for Congress not the courts.

    I do sort of wish the Court would intervene to say the term has gotten too long, but don't want a precedent like that for the Court to do so in other cases. Historical experience has been that although unchecked power of Congress is bad, the unreviewable power of the Court can be worse, as when it was busy invalidating the New Deal. Given precedent, I don't think th Court will, and I'd prefer we petition Congress, as has happened with the DMCA.

    But who cares what I think -- here is the transcript of the Oct. 9 oral argument, which discussion well describes the essentially simple dipute.