This blog has moved

This blog is now located at http://nerdlawdotorg.blogspot.com/.
You will be automatically redirected in 30 seconds, or you may click here.

For feed subscribers, please update your feed subscriptions to
http://nerdlawdotorg.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default.

Announcing: "Journalism’s Digital Transition: Unique Legal Challenges and Opportunities" @ Harvard Law School April 9, 2010

Announcing a one-day symposium and CLE program on Friday April 9, 2010 hosted by the Citizen Media Law Project and Cyberlaw Clinic at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center to celebrate the launch of the Online Media Legal Network (OMLN). The Network supports promising ventures and innovative thinkers in online and digital media by providing access to legal help that would otherwise be unavailable.

Entitled “Journalism’s Digital Transition: Unique Legal Challenges and Opportunities,” the program will bring together panels of academics, legal practitioners, and journalists. Topics will include:

• Saving Journalim From Itself? Hot News, Copyright Fair Use and News Aggregation
• Building and Managing Online Communities – Anonymity, Defamation and Privacy, Oh My!
• The Future of Journalism: Law and Ethics in a Changing Media Ecosystem

For more information, please see the conference website.

Something for the Family Guy Fans Out There. PrawfsBlawg has this assessment of a recent court decision in a copyright infringement case brought by Arthur Metrano over a scene in the movie Stewie Griffin: The Untold Story.

All Google, All the Time. Alexander Macgillivray, Deputy General Counsel for Products and Intellectual Property at Google, returned to @berkmancenter today for an engaging discussion of the Google Book Settlement. And John Palfrey has an announcement about two upcoming events to discuss the settlement. Meanwhile, Google has gone where few have gone before by winning a libel case in the UK (although a website in Amsterdam wasn't that lucky). And finally, Ars Technica reports that Barnes & Noble has teamed up with Google to build a library of over 700,000 books for its new e-book marketplace. Interestingly, B&N will be offering electronic copies of public domain books, scanned as part of the Google Book Search service, for free.

I Couldn't Pass Up the Headline. The AmLaw Daily has this post today about the on-going legal battle between Tolkien's heirs and New Line Cinema regarding royalties from the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The headline? "Nerd Law Heaven."

IP Law 101 for the Sports Fan. AmLaw Daily has this article about a recently filed trademark/copyright infringement case involving baseball trading cards.

Around the Center. The latest from the Berkman Center: John Palfrey has a post titled "ONI Releases Green Dam Software Analysis." JZ has this take on the use of Twitter to disseminate news about the goings-on in Iran.

More on the Salinger Case. THR, Esq. has the latest.

Seems Like Bad Precedent. Where's the deterrence factor for prosecutorial misconduct if the judge can just shoehorn the evidence in later at the sentencing phase? The Blog of the Legal Times reports.

Big Day for Music Cases. The Insider reports that the Lemonhead's lead singer, Evan Dando, has sued GM over use of "It's a Shame About Ray" in a 2008 TV campaign. And just last week a federal judge had a bit of fun with Bon Jovi song titles. (I'm having to exercise all sorts of self restraint to avoid a YouTube linkfest...)

Does Austrailian Copyright Law Not Have a Statute of Limitations Provision? Certainly they should have figured out the supposed similarity earlier.
Check it out for yourself:

I Always Knew Cap'n Crunch Was Shady. ABA Journal is reporting that a judge has tossed out a deceptive advertising complaint against Cap'n Crunch cereal.

I'm Feeling Special. First we get a First Lady, now we get a Supreme Court Justice.

The Wind Done Gone 2.0? The Media Law Prof Blog reports on a recent case filed by J.D. Salinger to halt publication of a "sequel" to Catcher in the Rye. Remix culture? Mark Randazza offers his own thoughts. And the Wall Street Journal has more here.

More Grist for the Anti-tethered Appliance Mill? Apple once again provides ammunition for JZ's fears.

That's One Way to Find a Job... Read all about how one guy from Italy got hired by Amazon through Second Life.

Time to Add "Rap Artist" to the List... of alternate career paths for lawyers. The ABA Journal has the details.

Yawn. Did anyone expect the MPAA's position to be different?

Courts About to Reign In Privacy Services? The Legal Satyricon has this report on a recent decision out of California finding that a privacy service may be held contributorily liable under the ACPA for its customer's actions. Things could get interesting...

Somebody's Been Watching Pump Up the Volume Again. Wired has this report about the (claimed) scope of the FCC's inspection authority. The claims at the beginning seem over hyped, especially since Wired doesn't cite any case where the FCC based their right to enter on the presence of a cell phone or other household device that transmits a radio frequency.

It's Been a While... Since I've seen Lessig this loquacious.

Maybe I'm Just Facebook Illiterate... but how would one even accomplish this from a technological standpoint? Create a page called "You've Been Sued" and send a request for him to join? And what happens if he's set his privacy settings to only appear in searches by his friends?

WalMart + Apple = ? On the one hand, I could see this increasing Apple's market share. But would it be at the cost of the "cool factor," which Apple has spent millions of advertising dollars to create?

Danger Mouse Pushing the Envelope Again. EFF has this report on Danger Mouse's upcoming "release." And where have I been that I didn't know Danger Mouse helped form Gnarls Barkley?

Increasing Pressures on Patent Regime. Intellectual Property Watch has this report on efforts at the UN to balance intellectual property rights with human rights. This comes a few days after the ACLU filed suit challenging patents granted over certain breast cancer genes on First Amendment grounds.

The Redskins-Cowboys Rivalry Can Live On. How Appealing has the latest (last?) on the challenge to the Redskins' trademarks filed by some Native American groups.

Google Waiving the Red Flag. CNet reports that Google has revised its AdWords policy to begin allowing some trademarks to appear in some AdWords copy. This comes on the heels of recent trademark infringement cases filed against the search company, including a class action recently filed in Texas on behalf of trademark owners.

Maybe One Day I'll Be Able to Afford Solar Power. Between this product and Veranda Solar's expandable panels, affordable, city-friendly solar power seems to be closer to a reality.

The Revenge of Eldred? Court strikes down law restoring foreign copyrights.

Kabuki Theater in Washington. Wendy has a wrap-up of this week's DMCA hearings.

We're All Criminals Now? Wired is reporting on a recent case upholding an Ohio man's felony hacking conviction as a result of his use of a work computer in violation of his employer's Internet policy. While we can all agree that use of a work computer to upload porn deserves some sort of censure, do we really want to go down a path that makes violations of private Internet terms of use into criminal conduct? Given the draconian nature of many employers' terms of use (the terms of which employers and employees often appear to have a tactic agreement to ignore), you could be risking more than just your job by booking that plane ticket to Boise to see your parents using your work computer.

Is this Really Unique to Twitter? Shouldn't the headline read "Potential Confidentiality Perils of Employees with Big Mouths"?

Oops. Ars Technica has an interesting report on the recent leak of the archive of a mailing list used by the American Psychological Association and the Pentagon to disucuss the profession's role in torture interrogations.

More from the "Nothing on the Internet is Private" Files. Wired has a report on a recent case out of New Jersey that finds two individuals suing their former-employer for invasion of privacy based on the employer gaining access to a private MySpace group (resulting in the "former" part of "former-employer"). Interesting discussions around the CMLP offices about whether or not the element of coercion takes this out of the typical employment-at-will framework.

All Your Facebooks Are Belong to Us? CNet is reporting on a new tool to allow hackers to control large numbers of Facebook accounts using cookie data.

Is Anyone Actually Surprised by Scalia's Reaction? He's never struck me as a subscriber to the "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" philosophy. The Chronicle reports on a Fordham professor's recent Internet privacy experiment.

Feeling Old. JZ weighs in on Cato's debate celebrating the 10-year anniversary of Lessig's Code.

But Where Will I Go to Find Erotic Massages? Sam has a new post up at the CMLP blog about the recent move by the South Carolina AG to crack down on Craigslist.

Just What I (Don't) Need... An application that encourages shopping. At least it looks like it will save you money. Tech Crunch has the details.

More Headaches for Trademark Owners. Eric Goldman reports that Google will begin selling trademarks as keywords in 190 additional countries.

Like Squeezing Blood from a Stone? PoynterOnline points to a discussion about a new project spearheaded by Murdoch to come up with a workable model to charge for online content. What type of features would such a system need to have to be commercially successful?

Get Your Copyright On. The Economist is hosting a week-long debate about copyright law. HLS/Berkman's own Terry Fisher is participating. Via Michael Geist.

Today's Funny. From Non Sequitur.

Much Ado About a Dot. I couldn't possibly let this one go without a post. Reuters is reporting that uber-trendy Sprinkles Cupcakes (which bills itself as "The Original Cupcake Bakery") has sued the rapidly-expanding Famous Cupcakes for trademark infringement. Sprinkles alleges that Famous Cupcakes has infringed its federally registered trademark for a circle within a circle placed at the center of a cupcake. Without commenting on the merits of Sprinkle's claims (since I haven't seen the complaint), I will make the observation that the "modern dot" design appears to be quite the fad in graphic design right now, appearing on bedding, stationary, swim meet logos, and numerous other items I'm too lazy to look up. (I'm pretty sure that one of the current in-store displays at Caribou Coffee uses something similar to the "modern dot.") As for the cupcake battles, Famous Cupcakes gets extra points for shipping their cupcakes nationwide, although I must give props to Sprinkles for announcing plans to come to DC. (And if you want to know just how out-of-hand the cupcake craze has become, do a search of TEAS for marks registered and applied-for in connection with cupcakes and bakery services...) Now I really want a cupcake.

I Bet NutraSweet is Wishing it had Splenda's Lawyers. The WSJ Law Blog is reporting on a recent decision issued by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in a trade dress infringement suit brought by the makers of Splenda against a generic artificial sweetener manufacturer. From the opinion:

[W]hile it is true that the packaging of other sweetener products often contain depictions of coffee, iced tea, baked goods, fruit, and/or cereal, these depictions do not diminish the inherent distinctiveness of the Splenda trade dress when we consider the trade dress as a whole. . . . [The fact that other sweetener products used a yellow, blue and white color scheme prior to the introduction of Splenda] does not detract from Splenda’s inherent distinctiveness.

Life Imitates Ad. Following up on this post, it seems like Coke Zero has gotten itself in a real trademark litigation. According to Law.com,

Last March, Baig's attorneys contacted Coke for the sixth time in a formal demand letter. On June 5, Coke received yet another letter from Baig's counsel stating that Baig was 'dead serious about filing suit' and promising to forward a copy of the complaint he intended to file if Coke did not meet Baig's demands by June 13. That complaint, according to the Coke pleading, never arrived.

I would say that that should be sufficient to support a DJ action.

</Radio Silence> I just had to share this one. According to Reuters, "Robert Burck -- for 10 years a fixture in Times Square, who strums a white guitar while dressed only in white cowboy boots and hat and skimpy white underwear -- filed the suit in February over video billboards depicting a blue M&M dressed in his signature outfit." (How did I miss this until now?) Now here's the interesting part: "Burck, who poses for photos with giggling tourists in return for dollars slipped into his boots, has trademarked his look and licensed his name and likeness to companies for endorsements and advertisements, including a Chevrolet commercial that appeared during a Super Bowl." 1) Yes, Burck has a registration for a design consisting of a man with a guitar in a cowboy hat and boots, but I'm not sure that constiutes "trademark[ing] his look." 2) The services in his registration for NAKED COWBOY seem really broad. Is singing in a video game really the same thing as "entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game"? 3) Isn't NAKED COWBOY a bit misdescriptive? 4) Am I the only one less likely to buy a product endorsed by this guy?

From the IP is Everywhere Files. Phosita points to this patent application comprising a "method and instrument for proposing marriage to an individual." Would have been a lot of wasted effort if Ellie said no...

And finally, here we have a Bearded Iris called "Copyright."

Second Life Gets its Own IPL Committee. The IPL section of the American Bar Association has annouced the creation of a new committee "responsible for monitoring developments in and educating members regarding legal issues that affect computer gaming and virtual worlds." For information on the Special Commitee on Computer Gaming and Virtual Worlds, or to sign up, go here.

Interesting Philosophical Approach. CNN reports in "Author suspicious of similar character on TV." From the article:

"I said, 'Holy jeez, talk about Freudian typos,' " Hamill recalled. "Hey, maybe this will sell the novel: 'You've seen the knockoff, now try the book.' Who knows?"

Let's Hope Apple Had an Indemnity Clause. Salon.com is reporting that "Eminem sues Apple for copyright infringement." From the article: "In this case, Apple received permission from Universal, Eminem's label, to sell his music on iTunes. But Eight Mile Style, his publisher, says that it also has the right to approve such sales. And because Eight Mile Style never allowed Universal to transfer music-downloading rights to Apple, it says that Apple has no right to sell the rapper's music."

A Strange Case Indeed. Law.com reports on a recent Eleventh Circuit copyright decision in "Citing Supreme Court Precedent, 11th Circuit Reverses Major Copyright Ruling." From the article: "By declaring Greenberg I moot, the new panel -- Judge Rosemary Barkett, Senior Judge Phyllis A. Kravitch and David G. Trager, a visiting U.S. district judge from the 2nd Circuit in New York -- also resolved a long-standing conflict with the 2nd Circuit created by the Birch opinion. Trager wrote the Greenberg II opinion for the new panel."

Scripts have covers? The AP reports in "Author says 'Knocked Up' ripped off." From the article: "She claims that while pitching her book to Hollywood producers, she learned of Apatow's project and the script, which she says had on it a picture of a martini glass with a pacifier around the stem -- the same as the cover of her book." Apparently, some people feel strongly enough about this to attempt to find uses of the martini glass and pacifier motif that predate Eckler's. The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog has a post about the suit that goes into more of the claimed differences between Eclker's memoir and the film.

So How Does He Plan on Getting Around the Statute of Limitations? World Entertainment News Network reports that "'N Sync In Plagiarism Controversy." From the article: "Former boy band 'N Sync are being sued over claims they plagiarised a song on their 2001 album Celebrity."

New Copyright Case Regarding Song Remakes. The AP reports that "Beyonce song in licensing dispute." From the article: "In the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court in New York, The Royalty Network Inc., argues that even though Beyonce's version of the song has an altered title and additional lyrics, the singer and her record company failed to get a written agreement to release their remake."

Vonage Gets a Reprieve. The Washington Post reports that "Vonage Can Sell Services During Appeal, Court Says." From the article: "Roger Warin, a lawyer for Vonage, told the appeals court during morning arguments that the company faced a 'real risk of insolvency' if barred from selling its service to new customers as the trial court ordered earlier this month. He asked the three-judge panel to extend an emergency reprieve allowing the company to continue adding new customers."

You Decide. Bloomberg reports that "Exxon Mobil Sues Hyundai Over "Mobis' Trademark." From the article: "Exxon Mobil, based in Irving, Texas, asked a federal judge in Wilmington, Delaware, yesterday to bar auto-parts maker Hyundai Mobis Co. from using the 'Mobis' logo and other potentially confusing marks."

And We Have a Circuit Split. 43(B)log reports on the recent Second Circuit decision in "Second Circuit rejects foreign famous marks doctrine federally, certifies state question." From the post: "The Second Circuit, after a long wait, has finally ruled on the validity of the famous marks exception to the territorial scope of trademark protection – and found no such exception in federal law."

So I Guess My I (Heart) DC Piggybank is Ok. The AP reports in "Inspired by TV Legal Dramas, North Carolina Man Wins T-shirt Battle in New York." (Of course, the PTO is actually in Virginia...) From the article: "A North Carolina man has won a nearly three-year battle with New York that allows his company to continue printing the logo 'I heart NC' on T-shirts."

Court Affirms Da Vinci Code Ruling. The AP reports that "Court says `Da Vinci Code' not a copy." From the article: "One of the judges said copyright protects an author's labor in researching and writing a book, but does not extend to facts, theories, and themes."

$200 Won't Cover the Filing Fees. The AP reports in "Town to Martha Stewart: Hands off our name." From the article: "The society's vote allows the trademark committee to file formal opposition to Stewart's plans, and it authorized spending $200 toward legal costs."

Looks Like Stanford's Fair Use Project Has Been Keeping Busy. Reuters reports that "James Joyce copyright case settled in California." From the article: "Carol Loeb Shloss, an acting professor of English at the California school, filed suit in June after she was forced by the estate to delete substantial portions of her book, 'Lucia Joyce: To Dance in the Wake.' It contained evidence of the younger Joyce's influence on her father's book 'Finnegans Wake.'"

ABBA Strikes Back. The AP reports that "Former ABBA members win court battle over musical script." From the article: "Seth, originally hired to write the script, argued he should be considered the main writer, but Ulvaeus and Andersson disputed the claim, saying his work was unusable and that they instead had to use a script by director Lars Rudolfsson and dramatist Jan Mark."

At Least He Didn't Tell Him it Was a Good Case. The Financial Expres reports in "Can’t tell your cokes apart? Sue someone." From the article: "The campaign is based on an oddball thought, that the executives at Coca-Cola who sell the flagship Coke Classic brand want to hire lawyers to sue their co-workers who sell Coke Zero. The grounds for the imaginary lawsuits would be 'taste infringement'—that is, it annoys the Coke Classic executives that no-calorie Coke Zero tastes so much like their sugared soft drink. In one commercial, a person identified as an actual lawyer who is not in on the joke, tells two actors portraying Coke Classic executives: 'It’ll be dismissed. You’ll be humiliated.' Other ads in the same litigious vein ask if you are 'a victim of taste confusion,' offer to help you 'sue a friend' and even assert that 'Coke Zero stole the taste of Coke.'"

Over/Unders on the Appeal? Reuters reports that "Cablevision Loses Network DVR court case." From the article: "Cablevision had hoped a network-based DVR system, called Remote Storage DVR or RS-DVR, would have done away with the need for the installation of hundreds of thousands of digital set-top boxes in subscribers' homes."

I Guess the Writer Doesn't Like the RIAA. But the information is interesting. Ars Technica reports that "Judge's decision leaves RIAA with lose-lose situation in Elektra v. Santangelo." From the article: "The case of Elektra v. Santangelo has been one of the more closely followed cases in the RIAA's crusade against suspected file sharers, due in no small part to the aggressiveness of Patti Santangelo's defense. Ray Beckerman is reporting that Judge Colleen McMahon has denied the RIAA's motion to dismiss the case without prejudice, ruling that the case must either proceed to trial or be dismissed with prejudice."

Is Anyone Surprised by this Ruling? The AP reports that "Court strikes down Internet porn law." From the article: "In the ruling, the judge said parents can protect their children through software filters and other less restrictive means that do not limit the rights of others to free speech."

I Wonder How a Fair Use Defense Would Play Here. Statesman.com reports in "Texas as a trademark." From the article: "Kalaouze’s company Kalcorp Enterprises sells T-shirts with the sayings “Mess with Texas” and “Hunt Texas” on them in College Station stores and online. Neither shirt uses UT’s stylized block lettering, said Allan Van Fleet, Kalaouze’s attorney."

Seriously?!? Journalism schools should start offering a class on Intellectual Property 101. I'm so sick of seeing this type of hyperbole. Ekklesia reports that "East African livelihoods at risk in trademark threat." From the article:

Thousands of East Africans could lose their livelihoods – and the freedom to use a word from their language – if a trademark application by a UK company succeeds, says a leading Christian development organisation.

The application, by the Kikoy Company UK Ltd, would give the company sole commercial rights to the term “kikoy” – a corruption of “kikoi”, the Kiswahili word for the distinctive colourful, wrap skirts worn by men and women along the East African coast.

(And lest you argue that this group isn't composed of real journalists, compare this with other reporting on this issue here and here.)

Why Is the PTO Issuing This, Rather Than the Copyright Office? (And why is the PTO currently advertising for a copyright advisor position?) The Register reports that "US Patent Office says P2P threatens national security." From the article: "The US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) has launched a stinging attack on peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing services, publishing a report from its Office of International Relations earlier this month." You can read the report here.

It Looks Like This One Didn't Get a Thorough Quality Review Before Being Sent Out. Although the grounds for refusal appear to be spot-on. WorldNetDaily.com reports in "Feds get 'disgusting' over 'Obamanation'." From the article: "'It is a Wikipedia entry for a pretty disgusting, unorthodox sexual device,' said Cotto, struggling to find a way to politely describe what he received. 'I was at work, and my jaw dropped open. I literally screamed for my co-workers. They freaked out just as I did.'" Interestingly, if you look at the Trademark Document Retrieval system for Ser. No. 77/091,557, the Office Action is conspicuously missing (although it's attached to the March 7, 2007 response). Finally, is anyone else as shocked as I am that an office action issued against this application less than two weeks after it was filed?

Feds Crack Down on Invention Scheme. Newsday reports in "Company advertised to help patent seekers under investigation." From the article: "PTI salespeople tell inventors that the company makes money by licensing the products. But by Gumpel's own admission, the company that supposedly licenses PTI's inventions has never successfully negotiated a license agreement."

That's What You Call a Bad Fact. The Seattle Times reports in "Earthbound legal squabble leaves Duvall cafe moonstruck." From the article: "Before he opened, Snow searched the Internet for high-end chocolates, came across Moonstruck's Web site and ordered a box for a taste test, he said. He was so impressed with the quality, he said, he contacted the company about selling the chocolates in his store."

Another Argument for Recognizing Residual Goodwill. Since Life would have been presumed abandoned. Slate reports in "Attack of the Zombie Brands!" From the article: "Life, now in its third incarnation, has been similarly updated to keep pace with the times—or at least to stay just behind them. Founded in 1936, the Time, Inc. property was a great, picture-laden weekly magazine. But in 1972, having been superseded by television and other magazines, it stopped publication. The powerful brand was revived as a monthly from 1978 to 2000. But, having been superseded by television, other magazines, and the Internet, it closed again in 2000. In 2004, Life returned as a celebrity-oriented, fluffy weekly that is inserted in Sunday newspapers."

Off Topic, But Can You Imagine Poll Results Like This in the US? Reuters reports in "Most Germans want speed limit on autobahn?" From the article: "The survey also showed that 56 percent of Germans believe flights should be taxed at a higher rate because of the environmental damage they cause."

After 9/11, How Original is That, Really? Reuters reports that "New York artists sue NBC over 'Heroes' concept." From the article: "The artists said their work focused on an artist who paints the future and who specifically paints the destruction of two landmark buildings in New York City. They alleged this was 'strikingly similar' to the character of Isaac Mendez on 'Heroes,' whose paintings of the future depict an explosion in New York City."

Would the Doctrine of Equivalents Affect the Strength in the U.S.? Reuters reports in "Court: 'Oscar' may be generic term in Italian." From the article: "In denying AMPAS' motion for summary judgment, U.S. District Court Judge Audrey Collins wrote that there is no question that the Oscar mark is strong in the English language and, 'The use of 'Oscar' to describe an award or awards program is arbitrary or fanciful and deserves maximum protection. However, EchoStar has presented evidence showing that the word 'Oscar' could be considered generic in Italy and in the Italian language.'"

I Guess She Won't be Guesting on The Simpsons. The AP reports that "Carol Burnett sues over use of Charwoman." From the article: "Carol Burnett has filed a $2 million copyright infringement lawsuit against 20th Century Fox, claiming her cleaning woman character was portrayed on the animated series 'Family Guy.' The U.S. District Court lawsuit, which was filed Thursday, said the Fox show didn't have the 73-year-old comedian's permission to include her cleaning woman character, Charwoman, in an April 2006 episode." (Full disclosure: My firm represents News Corp.)

I Bet This One is Headed for an Appeal. Reuters reports that "Vonage found guilty in Verizon patent case." From the article: "The eight-member jury assessed Vonage $58 million in damages and ordered it to pay a 5.5 percent royalty rate on Vonage sales going forward."

Interesting False Advertising Case. Law.com reports in "How Sweet It Isn't: Equal, Splenda to Clash in Trial." From the article: "In a court battle between the makers of the nation's leading sugar substitutes -- Equal and Splenda -- a federal judge has ruled that a jury must decide whether Splenda is misleading consumers by claiming in its ads and on its packaging that the product is 'made from sugar so it tastes like sugar.'"

Am I Missing Something? From this description, I don't see how Ono owns a copyright in the material. The BBC reports that "Lennon documentary blocked by Ono." From the article: "The footage was shot by Ono's former husband Tony Cox and was sold in 2000 for $1m (£760,000) to Mr Thomas and his backers."

Whose Afraid of Webcasting? Certainly sounds like the RIAA is. Wired reports that "U.S. Copyright Royalty Board Rejects Webcasters, Embraces SoundExchange." From the article: "Even adding in ancillary revenues from occasional video gateway ads, banner ads on the website, and so forth, total revenues per listener-hour would only be in the 1.0 to 1.2 cents per listener-hour range. That math suggests that the royalty rate decision — for the performance alone, not even including composers' royalties! — is in the in the ballpark of 100% or more of total revenues."

WikiPatents? The Washington Post reports in "Open Call From the Patent Office." From the article: "The Patent and Trademark Office is starting a pilot project that will not only post patent applications on the Web and invite comments but also use a community rating system designed to push the most respected comments to the top of the file, for serious consideration by the agency's examiners. A first for the federal government, the system resembles the one used by Wikipedia, the popular user-created online encyclopedia."

Some Good News for Microsoft. Reuters reports that "Judge rules for Microsoft in Alcatel-Lucent suit." From the article: "U.S. District Judge Rudi Brewster in San Diego dismissed all of Alcatel-Lucent's claims in a summary judgment, meaning that the jury trial set to begin on March 19 will not take place. Alcatel-Lucent said it plans to appeal the ruling."

Sounds Like a Belated Assertion of its Rights. The Washington Post reports that "MP3 Patent Verdict Harmless To Music Fans -- For Now." From the article: "Alcatel-Lucent sued Microsoft over audio-file technology that the software giant first included in its Windows operating system in 1998 and later built into its Windows Media Player."

Interesting First Sale Case. IP Law Observer points to this recent Sixth Circuit case analyzing the first sale doctrine under trademark and copyright law.

Interesting Negotiating Strategy. The AP reports that "Cisco, Apple settle iPhone trademark lawsuit." From the article: "The companies said Wednesday they reached an agreement that will allow Apple to use the name for its sleek new multimedia device in exchange for exploring wide-ranging 'interoperability' between the companies' products in the areas of security, consumer and business communications. No other details of the agreement were released."

Somehow I Doubt the Advertisers Are Getting Their Money's Worth... The AP reports that "Entrepreneurs profit from free Web names." From the article: "The department store chain Neiman Marcus Group Inc. even filed a federal lawsuit last year accusing the registration company Dotster Inc. of tasting hundreds of names meant to lure Internet users who mistype Web addresses. At one point, the lawsuit said, the misspelled NeimuMarcus.com featured ads for Target, Nordstrom and other rivals."

Now That's Medicine I Wouldn't Mind Taking. Reuters reports in "Feeding your brain: new benefits found in chocolate." From the article: "Funded by candy maker Mars Inc., which provided a specially formulated liquid cocoa concoction for the research, the studies suggest that flavanols increase blood flow to the brain and may hold promise for treating some vascular impairments."

Much Ado About a Bear of Very Little Brain. Reuters reports that "California judge lets family keep Winnie the Pooh." From the article: "In a written order issued on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper granted the Slesingers' motion to dismiss the case, in which the granddaughters of Pooh author A.A. Milne and illustrator E.H. Shepard, sued to terminate the Slesingers' rights to the character and reassign them to Disney."

Are Art Prints Usually "Autographed"? Looks like Keith Urban has a pretty good claim. The AP reports that "Keith Urban files suit over Web address." From the article: "The Web site includes the statement: 'You have reached the site of Keith Urban. To those who don't know, oil painting is one of my hobbies.' It then directs viewers to a gallery of paintings and offers a limited edition of prints for sale [which prints are described as being "autographed]."

Interesting Resolution. Reuters reports that "Apple and Beatles settle trademark squabble." From the article: "The two companies said Apple Inc. would now own all the trademarks related to 'Apple' and would license certain trademarks back to Apple Corps for continued use."

It's About Time. Google Watch reports that Google Sues Leo Stoller for Racketeering. From the article: "Google's lawsuit, which comes after several years of legal wrangling with Stoller, after Stoller declared bankruptcy, and after Google was granted relief by the courts to pursue litigation, alleges that Stoller and his businesses are falsely claiming trademark rights for the purpose of harassing and attempting to extort money."

Thomas v. Scalia. That's a new one. The AP reports that "Court Rules in Favor of MedImmune."From the article: "MedImmune 'assuredly did contend that it had no obligation under the license to pay royalties on an invalid patent,' Scalia wrote. 'Promising to pay royalties on patents that have not been held invalid does not amount to a promise' not to contest the matter."

One to Watch. Reuters reports that "U.S. group sues Nokia, Samsung over Bluetooth." From the article: "A U.S. research institute has sued Nokia, Samsung Electronics and Matsushita-owned Panasonic for violating a patent for Bluetooth technology, potentially putting the free wireless standard at risk."

But Does He Care About Black People? Reuters reports that "Evel Knievel sues rapper Kanye West over video." From the article: "The lawsuit claims West, his Roc-A-Fella Records label and the video's director infringed on Knievel's trademark-protected name and likeness by depicting West as a stunt performer named 'Evel Kanyevel,' who dresses in a star-spangled, 'V'-striped white jumpsuit like the one Knievel is famous for wearing."

RIM Back In Court. Reuters reports that "RIM sues for infringement over Samsung's BlackJack." From the article: "In the suit filed December 8 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, RIM alleges Samsung has decided to name one of its handheld devices the BlackJack to ride on the coattails of success enjoyed by RIM's BlackBerry line of smartphones."

Now That's a New One. The AP reports that "Andy Griffith sues Andy Griffith." From the article: "The lawsuit says the former Fenrick changed his name for the 'sole purpose of taking advantage of Griffith's notoriety in an attempt to gain votes' and asks the court to order Fenrick to go back to his original name." I must say, I can't imagine how there's any copyright infringement here, and this doesn't sound like true trademark usage...

It's All About IP. The National Journal reports on what we can expect under a Democratic Congress in "What If: Judiciary." From the article: "In the House, Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., would take over the chairmanship of the Judiciary Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property Subcommittee. He would look to protect his nearby Hollywood interests by cracking down on piracy and protecting against copyright infringement of TV, music and movie productions."

Do People Still Use Palms? (And yes, that's a joke. No need for irate Treo users to write in.) InternetNews.com reports that "NTP Sues Palm Over Wireless Patents." From the article: "NTP, a Richmond, Va.-based owner of intellectual property patents concerning wireless e-mail and other technologies, filed suit alleging that the handheld devices and services Palm uses in its wireless e-mail systems infringes NTP patents in the United States."