Intellectual Property - Prof. Noveck

Summer Internship Opportunity

An alumni of NYLS who works at Johnson & Johnson has asked if we can identity an outstanding candidate for a summer internship position.

The task would be assist in creating a "Roadmap" for future acquisitions, to be jointly used by the Law Department, The Corporate Business Development Group and the Finance and Internal Audit teams.  The goal would be a online resource, with case studies, "best practices" and related forms covering a number forms of business development including acquisitions, mergers, JV's, licensing and equity investments.  Ideally the candidate should have a strong interest in Business Law, as developing the content is 90% of the work, and an understanding the actual technology the remaining 10%.
This would be a paid internship and s/he would be able to participate in the other summer intern activities, outings, etc.

Please send expressions of interest along with resume's to:

Davidr.johnson@verizon.net

SPORTS LAW: WHAT’S YOUR GAME PLAN?

Download sports_law_committee_event_flyer_1_13_06.doc

An Interactive Panel for Law Students
•    Explore your interests
•    Consider your career goals
•    Learn how others got into the business

Scheduled Panelists include:
Rachel Berger – General Counsel – Marketing, Octagon
Alan Chang – Associate General Counsel, New York Yankees
Howard Robbins – Partner, Proskauer Rose
Andrew Siegel – Assistant General Counsel, CBS
Lisa Stancati – Counsel, ESPN

Moderator: 
Marc Ackerman – Committee Chair and Partner, White & Case, LLP

Following the panel discussion, the panelists and other members of the Sports Law Committee will be available for a “meet and greet” to discuss their careers and answer questions.

Tuesday, March 28, 2006
6pm
City Bar Association – 42 West 44th Street
Simpson Room

This program is free - Space is limited
Registrations will be accepted on a first come, first serve basis
R.S.V.P. jarose@whitecase.com

Internship

To keep abreast of such postings in the future, please sign up for IP Soc blog

SUMMER INTERNSHIP POSITION WITH STANFORD’S
CENTER FOR INTERNET AND SOCIETY

The Center for Internet and Society (CIS) at Stanford Law School is hiring a Summer Intern to work public interest issues involving technology and the Internet.

The Center for Internet and Society is a leading center for the study of the relationship between the public interest, law and technology. CIS was founded by Professor of Law Lawrence Lessig and is headed by Executive Director attorney Jennifer S. Granick, who also teaches the Cyberlaw Clinic.
The Summer Intern works with Attorney Granick and Professor Lessig on CIS and Cyberlaw Clinic litigation, including cases challenging the extension of copyright to works that had passed into the public domain, protecting the rights of Internet publishers to speak anonymously on-line, protecting speech interests against claims of intellectual property infringement, and providing legal information in response to cease and desist letters sent to Internet publishers.

The Summer Intern also assists in preparing materials and research for Cyberlaw Clinic course and caseload, keeping the CIS website and calendar up-to-date and various administrative tasks on an as-needed basis.

The position is for approximately 12 weeks. Second and third year law students are preferred, as is experience with computers, including email, instant messaging, Movable Type, and Excel. Hourly rate in accordance with the Law School work-study rates, to be announced. Interested applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, writing sample and a list of references by February 28, 2006 to Executive Director Jennifer S. Granick at: Crown Quadrangle, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford, CA 94305-8610.

For further information, please contact Ms. Granick’s legal assistant, Lynda Johnston, at: 650-725-8571 or lyndaj_at_stanford.edu.

Stolen ID

Going waaaay back to the theories behind IP, specifically copyright. I remember reading that the US chose the the utilitarian theory over other theories such as the personhood theory (see droit d'auteur).  I can understand why the US went the way it did, but there is much to be said about the other theories, specifically the personhood theory.

I just realized that when I post, typepad lists "Ch3wiE3" as the author.  Ch3wiE3 was my old AIM screen name ("SN").  I went by that name for years, I mean from AOL 1.5 all the way up to 5.0 or 6.0 (I forget).  Back then to instant message you had to have AOL, so I did, but I lost my AOL privileges for some time, and didn't get them back until about 2 years ago.

AOL used to have this policy that once you canceled your membership your SN died and it could never be used again, but when they came out with AIM a lot people wanted to switch to the free AIM service and keep their SNs, so AOL allowed you resurrect your SN if you hopped on one foot while singing the alphabet song backwards... I don't remember what you had to do, but you could get your SN back.  So most of my friends were able to make the switch from AOL to AIM and keep their SN's.  I didn't get back online until some time after AIM first came out, and by that time EVERYONE was on AIM, and somewhere from the time when AIM first came out to when I got back online, AOL got rid of their graveyard of SN's and opened up all "dead" SN for use to the public.

So, I finally get back online, and I'm all excited because Ch3wiE3 was going to make a triumphant return and be reunited with all his online homies from back in the days... but there would be no happy ending.  When AIM asked what I wanted my SN to be I typed in "Ch3wiE3" and AIM told me that that name was already in use... oh and you better believe I was pissed off, who in the world would take my SN!?

I don't even know if a SN can is copyrightable, but lets just assume it is.  A lot went into that SN there's a whole story behind those 5 letters and 2 numbers... this sounds corny, but there's a little bit of me in there.  I can understand why one might prefer the utilitarian theory, but there's a lot to be said for the personhood theory.  I mean, someone just took my SN, in the highly unlikely event that I write a book, and someone took that from me...

THIRD BIENNIAL WRITING COMPETITION

Link: THIRD BIENNIAL WRITING COMPETITION.

THIRD BIENNIAL WRITING COMPETITION

First Place:
$1,200 in cash
Publication in the Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Second Place:
$650 in cash
Publication in the Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Third Place:
MicroMash Online MBE Review Course
Publication in the Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Do you have your finger on the pulse of new and emerging trends in technology law? If so, we want to hear from you!

Along with Westlaw, PMBR Multistate Bar Review Course, MicroMash Online Multistate Bar Review Course and the law firms of Hancock, Daniel, Johnson & Nagle, P.C., Robinson & Gerson, P.C., and McCandlish Holton, P.C., we are proud to announce the third Richmond Journal of Law & Technology Biennial Writing Competition. The topic for this year's writing competition is: "Emerging Topics in Law & Technology: What's Next?" This national competition is open to all full-time law students and will provide a forum for exploring cutting-edge issues applicable to areas in which technology and the law intersect. Students may write on any law and technology topic, including, but not limited to, biotechnology, intellectual property, patent and trademark, and the Internet.

Copyrighting Character

Two Items on this topic:

First, NCSoft and Marvel settled the City of Heroes case today with no changes to the City of Heroes game or the character creation engine.

Second, the New York Times had a great story this weekend about Yogi Bear.  The article writes:

"From his debut in 1958 on "The Huckleberry Hound Show," Yogi never missed an opportunity to announce that he was smarter than the average bear. He seems to have outwitted a few copyright lawyers along the way: he took his moniker from the celebrated Yankees catcher, of course, and his tilted porkpie hat, his tie, his sonorous voice and his hipster mannerisms from Art Carney's portrayal of Ed Norton on "The Honeymooners." And didn't his anthropomorphic, picnic basket-robbing, park-ranger-outwitting antics suggest the work of another popular cartoon studio, doc?"

Worth reading the full article.

GoogleNet Event

"GoogleNet" and Fair Use:  How the "Open Web" May (or may not) Threaten the Rights or Authors, Publishers, and Copyright Holders   

 

Wednesday, December 14, 2005, 6:30 - 8 pm
House of the Association, 42 West 44th Street

The Bar Association Presents a Roundtable discussion of the legal and practical questions raised by two recent lawsuits filed against Google, in response to its plans to scan copyrighted works online, in order to make contents searchable by keyword.   The suits, filed separately by the Author's Guild and several writers, and by several major publishers, contend that doing so absent explicit consent is a plain copyright violation.   But Google contends that such scanning, done in conjunction with major libraries, is simply its own effort to create a wholly legal digital card catalog.   

The panelists will discuss how copyright law should treat such content-scanning programs, the extent to which Google (or any other search engine) can or should truly be considered a "digital library," what harm or unfairness such programs pose for authors and publishers, and, more broadly, who has, or should have, the right to control information contained in books. 

Moderator:        JAY HIMES

 

Chief, Antitrust Bureau, Office of New York Attorney General

Introduction:     KENNETH D.  DREIFACH

   
Chief, Internet Bureau, Office of New York Attorney General

Speakers:    JON FINE

                  
VP, Associate General Counsel, Random House

SUSAN CRAWFORD

 
Professor, Cardozo Law School

PAUL AIKEN

                  
Executive Director, Authors' Guild

CAMERON STRACHER

 

Professor, New York Law School; Novelist and Author, "Double Billing: A Young Lawyer's Tale of Greed, Sex, Lies, and the Pursuit of a Swivel Chair"   

Sponsored by:
Committee on Information Technology Law,

Kenneth D. Dreifach, Chair
Committee on Copyright & Literary Property,

  Robert W. Clarida, Chair

Members of the Association, their guests and all other interested persons are invited to attend.

No fee or registration is required.

The Association of the Bar of the City of New York
42 West 44th Street, New York, NY 10036
(212) 382-6600,  www.nycbar.org 

 

Jay-Z v. Diamond Dallas Page

http://www.vh1.com/news/articles/1517546/20051206/jay_z.jhtml?headlines=true

The wrestler claims that he originally began using the hand gesture that Jay-Z has since adopted to identify his Roc-A-Fella Record company. Page claims that Jay-Z has caused consumer confusion by using the gesture.

Diamond Dallas Sues Jay-Z Over 'Diamond Cutter' Hand Sign

Wrestler claims he invented the two-handed gesture years ago.

by Chris Harris

Former pro wrestler Diamond Dallas Page is suing Jay-Z, claiming the hip-hop heavyweight has illegally adopted his trademark hand gesture — the "Diamond Cutter" — as his own.

The suit, filed in Los Angeles Federal Court on Friday, accuses Jay-Z and Roc-A-Fella Records of trademark and copyright infringement as well as misappropriation of the hand symbol. Page is seeking an injunction (meaning Jay-Z would be prohibited from using the gesture) and unspecified monetary damages.

Page's lawyer, George Gallegos, said Diamond Dallas (born Page Falkinberg) brought the legal action against the Def Jam CEO in order to protect his livelihood.

"People would come up to him and ask him if he was letting Jay-Z use it or if he had licensed it to him," Gallegos said of the symbol, which he claims his client created in 1996 and copyrighted years ago. "People [would also] say he's using Jay-Z's sign."

On the cover of Page's new book, "Yoga for Regular Guys: The Best Damn Workout on the Planet!," he can be seen sporting a T-shirt of the hand gesture. On his Web site, the same image can be seen above the words "A symbol of excellence since 1996."

Gallegos said he first took the hand-gesture matter directly to Jay's lawyers, but they were not receptive, saying that the real issue was how Diamond Dallas was using Jay's symbol inappropriately. Gallegos said he provided the rapper's people with magazine covers, various Dallas merchandise and video footage dating back to the mid-1990s showing Page throwing the "Cutter."

"If you look at [Jay-Z's] 'Encore' video you can see fans using the 'Diamond Cutter' sign, and in video of Diamond Dallas ... if you only looked at the fans from both those tapes, you'd think it's the same person performing," Gallegos said. "Jay-Z and Roc-A-Fella Records use this symbol to promote themselves, to promote their artists, to promote their music and to promote their fanbase. People have come to recognize [Page by this symbol], and the way that it's being used by Jay-Z and Roc-A-Fella is taking value away from it and creating confusion upon the public."

Jay-Z's attorney, Michael Guido, could not be reached for comment. Calls to Jay-Z's label for comment were not returned.

The Risk of Online RISK

I found this on a Trademark Blog. Apparently someone has created an online game in conjuction with Google Maps that bears a close resemblance to the board game RISK. Authorized online versions of RISK were created in 1996 and 2000. I tried to find a version of the online game, but it has since been shutdown due in main part to the following cease and desist letter sent by counsel for Hasbro (the owner of both Copyright AND Trademarks associated with RISK). Hasbro's counsel claimed the game infringed trademark because it led to consumer confusion as to Hasbro's authorization, association, or sponsorship of the game. Counsel further claimed dilution would occur as to RISK's source-identifying mark if the online game continued.

The creator of the game ASOOJ on Google Maps have been requesting ideas on how to change the game to avoid trademark and copyright infringement. Stay tuned to see if a new and improved (and litigation proof) Google Maps game is restored.

Hasbro Defends Irkutsk

Via Slashdot, a demand letter sent to the distributor of a game based on RISK, using Google map:

December 1, 2005
By FedEx and Email
-----
====

Re: Infringement of Hasbro, Inc.'s RISK Copyrights and Trademark

Dear Mr. ====:

We are counsel for Hasbro, Inc. (.Hasbro.), the owner of the copyrights and trademarks for the famous RISK game. We write concerning the online Risk. game (the "Game.") that you have made available for use in conjunction with Google maps at your website . . . Your Game appears to copy elements of Hasbro's RISK game and rules as well as its trademark. The RISK game, including the rules, is the copyrighted property of Hasbro. Hasbro also owns the trademark rights to the RISK name. Your unauthorized use of the RISK game constitutes copyright infringement in violation of 17 U.S.C. 501. Your unauthorized use of the RISK name also violates the federal trademark laws, including 15 U.S.C. 1114(1) and 1125(a), by creating a likelihood of confusion with respect to Hasbro's authorization or sponsorship of or association with your commercial activities. Even if confusion were not likely, your unauthorized use of these elements is likely to dilute the distinctive quality of the RISK game and trademark and hamper their ability to function as source-identifying marks in violation of 15 U.S.C. � 1125(c) and numerous state anti-dilution laws.

We therefore demand that you immediately cease and desist from any further use of the RISK� game and mark by removing the Game and all references to it from your website.

Please confirm to me in writing as soon as possible, and in any event within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter your agreement to the above. This letter does not purport to be a complete statement of the facts or the law and is without prejudice to Hasbro.s legal and equitable rights.
Sincerely yours,

[attorney name]

Hennessy wins China piracy case

Two Chinese firms have been ordered to pay compensation to drinks maker Societe Jas Hennessy, and to stop selling items breaching its trademarks. A Shanghai court said wines marketed by Xiang Mu Tong Trading and bottled by Xiamen Golden Huanya Food were too similar to Hennessy's name. They had been produced under the names Hanlissy or Henglishi in Chinese. The court said the Chinese companies had sought to mislead consumers.

(This is a good example of similar products being sold under similar names)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4484362.stm