Tag Archives: intellectual property

A conversation between voluntaryists: What's with IP?

Source: Everything Voluntary
by Kenny Kelly & Kilgore Forelle

"Kilgore and I have had another discussion. This time about intellectual property (IP) laws and their role, if any, in a free society. This topic is not as much of a debate as the last, but still worth having." (06/17/17)


Segregated Witness and the possibility of patent infringement

Source: Bitcoin.com
by Jamie Redman

"During the late evening of June 1, Bitcoin.com received an email from an anonymous source who has been researching possible patent infringements associated with the Segregated Witness (Segwit) protocol. According to the researcher, Segwit may be at risk violating two specific patents filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)." (06/02/17)


Intellectual property dealt a hard blow

Source: A Geek With Guns
by Christopher Burg

"I pull no punches when it comes to my views on intellectual property. While I want intellectual property abolished entirely, I do admit that some uses are more egregious than others. One of the most egregious uses is restricting what consumers can do with a product after they’ve purchased it. John Deere made headlines by using intellectual property laws to prevent farmers from repairing their own equipment. Printer manufacturers have also been using intellectual property laws to restrict consumer access to third-party ink. The Supreme Court’s most recent ruling dealt a hard blow to those printer manufacturers …" (05/31/17)


No evidence that "stronger" patents will mean more innovation

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation
by Vera Ranieri

"Right now, the patent lobby — in the form of the Intellectual Property Owners Association and the American Intellectual Property Law Association — is demanding 'stronger' patent laws. They want to undo Alice v. CLS Bank and return us to a world where 'do it on a computer' ideas are eligible for a patent. This would help lawyers file more patent applications and patent litigation. But there’s no evidence that such laws would benefit the public or innovation at all." (05/24/17)


SCOTUS: Patent trolls' loss is a win for honest commerce

Source: Garrison Center
by Thomas L Knapp

"On May 22, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously — and correctly — on a fairly obscure case that nonetheless has huge implications in an area where millions or even billions of dollars are frequently at stake. In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, the Court came down against the practice of 'forum shopping' in patent disputes. Hopefully this will reduce the incidence of 'patent trolling.'" (05/23/17)


US Supreme Court limits "venue shopping" for patent cases

Source: The Hill

"A Supreme Court decision on Monday will limit the controversial practice of 'venue shopping' — where plaintiffs pick court locations that they believe will be favorable to the cases they’re arguing. The court reversed a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision from last year that had been used as justification for bringing cases to venues wherever the companies involved happened to conduct business. Companies will now be required to bring lawsuits to where the targeted company is incorporated." (05/22/17)


Secret new European copyright proposal spells disaster for free culture

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation
by Jeremy Malcolm

"EFF has learned about a new proposal for European law that takes aim at online streaming services, but which will strike a serious blow to creators and their fans. The proposal, which would effectively ban online streaming services from hosting works under free licenses, could spell an end to services like the Luxembourg-based Jamendo that offers access to free music online, and raise new barriers to offering freely-licensed works on other streaming platforms. This is all part of Europe's proposed new Digital Single Market Directive, which is presently doing the rounds of the three European institutions (the European Commission, European Parliament, and Council of the European Union) that will have to reach agreement on its final text." (05/15/17)


Hollywood-friendly copyright bill passes House of Representatives

Source: The Verge

"The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would make the Register of Copyright a presidentially appointed position, instead of a part of the Library of Congress. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), will now move to the Senate, where it’s being put forward by Senators Rob Portman (R-OH) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND). As we’ve written previously, this bill would grant the US Copyright Office more agency in advocating for specific copyright policy — something that’s previously led to conflict between the office and the Library of Congress. Goodlatte and other supporters of the bill describe it as a way to make the Register of Copyright democratically accountable, since they would be confirmed by the Senate rather than chosen by the Librarian of Congress. But it would also open it up to greater influence from lobbyists, particularly from groups that stand to benefit from harsher copyright rules — like the MPAA, which has praised the bill’s passage." [editor's note: Copyright is like a dinosaur that's dead but still flopping around and smashing stuff with its tail because the nerve signal telling it to lie still and decompose hasn't reached its brain yet – TLK] (04/27/17)


Another lawsuit tries to force an ISP into being a copyright cop

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation
by Mitch Stoltz

"Major record labels are once again trying to force an Internet service provider into enforcing their copyrights by cutting off customers from the Internet over copyright accusations. The lawsuit they filed against Texas broadband provider Grande Communications suffers from many of the same due process problems as the BMG Music Publishing v. Cox Communications case, which is on appeal. The issue in both cases is whether and when a home broadband provider should cut off a customer’s Internet service when someone using that service is accused of copyright infringement. The legal hook for this controversy is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Section 512, which protects ISPs and other Internet intermediaries against the risk of massive copyright penalties stemming from a customer’s copyright infringement. But to get the protection of Section 512, an ISP has to terminate 'subscribers and account holders … who are repeat infringers' in 'appropriate circumstances.'" (04/26/17)


Appeals court: Uber engineer can't get help from the 5th Amendment

Source: Ars Technica

"Anthony Levandowski, the embattled Uber engineer who has been accused of illegally downloading thousands of documents while he worked at Google, won't be able to stop Uber from handing over documents by pleading the Fifth Amendment. That's the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, published today. Levandowski filed an emergency motion with the appeals court, seeking to overturn the decision. The decision was made by US District Judge William Alsup, who had told Levandowski he would need to hand over an unredacted privilege log. … Levandowski's lawyers had made a novel legal argument in the lower court. It wasn't just that their client wouldn't hand over certain documents: his lawyers argued that Waymo — Alphabet's self-driving car division — shouldn't even be entitled to see the names of documents they were withholding, which is what's contained in the privilege log. According to Levandowski's lawyers, revealing the name of a third-party firm that created a report about his startup company — a company that was later purchased by Uber for $680 million — would create a path for prosecutors to follow in the event of criminal prosecution." (04/26/17)