Law Commons^™

Copyright And Underwater Cultural Heritage, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

This article will focus on three aspects of copyright law as it applies to the photography of underwater cultural heritage. First, to what extent can a salvor claim exclusive rights to photograph a particular site? Second, who is the author (or who are the authors) of such underwater photography, which increasingly involves the use of remote-controlled robotic drones? Third, to what extent can a State control the use of underwater photography that falls within its territorial waters?8 All three of these aspects have been the subject of lawsuits and judicial opinions in the United States; and those opinions shed light …

Emojis And The Law, Eric Goldman

Faculty Publications

Emojis are an increasingly important way we express ourselves. Though emojis may be cute and fun, their usage can lead to misunderstandings with significant legal stakes—such as whether someone should be obligated by contract, liable for sexual harassment, or sent to jail.

Our legal system has substantial experience interpreting new forms of content, so it should be equipped to handle emojis. Nevertheless, some special attributes of emojis create extra interpretative challenges. This Article identifies those attributes and proposes how courts should handle them.

One particularly troublesome interpretative challenge arises from the different ways platforms depict emojis that are nominally standardized …

Brief Of Amici Curiae - Copyright And Intellectual Property Law Professors In Support Of Defendant-Petitioner Pandora Media, Inc., Tyler T. Ochoa, Joseph C. Gratz

Faculty Publications

Brief submitted to the Supreme Court of the State of California.

Case No. S240649 FLO & EDDIE, INC., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PANDORA MEDIA, INC., Defendant-Petitioner.

Plaintiff Flo & Eddie, Inc., contends that the phrase “exclusive ownership” in California Civil Code section 980 includes all possible uses to which a copyrightable work may be put, including an exclusive right of public performance. At the time California Civil Code section 980 was first enacted in 1872, however, the phrase “exclusive ownership” in relation to a copyrightable work meant something different and much narrower: namely, the right of first publication (reproduction and sale) only. …

Dr. Seuss, The Juice And Fair Use Revisited: Two Decades Of Parody And Satire In Copyright Law, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

This essay will summarize some of the salient features and arguments made in the original article. It will also analyze copyright infringement cases in the last 20 years applying the fair use doctrine to parody and satire.

Inequality, Innovation, And Patents, Colleen V. Chien

Faculty Publications

This article explores the relationship between patents, innovation, and inequality, making three contributions. First, it reveals how shifts in patented innovation over the last several decades have contributed to broader social and economic shifts, away from manufacturing-based, domestic, and independent innovation, and towards digital, foreign, and corporate innovation, validating both optimistic accounts of immigration-driven, digital prosperity and pessimistic accounts of the shrinking role of domestic innovators. Second, it offers a framework for understanding the relationship between innovation and inequality that includes both the potentially inequality-increasing impacts of innovation and the potentially inequality-decreasing impacts of innovation and specifies the contribution of …

Licensing & Law Who Owns An Avatar?, Tyler T. Ochoa, Jaime Banks

Faculty Publications

Both players and game developers have great influence over how avatars—via their assembled components— manifest in digital game play. Developers craft their foundational platforms and draw on those infrastructures to craft dynamic code that enables movements, appearances, and abilities. But those potentials call into question whether avatars are avatars until they are played—players click avatars into being, customize their bodies and attire, drive their actions and interactions, and sometimes bring them outside the game world through physical representations. So, given avatars’ joint reliance on developers and players, and given legal frameworks such as copyright law, who really “owns” a video …

The Market For Software Innovation Through The Lens Of Patent Licenses And Sales, Colleen V. Chien

Faculty Publications

Software innovation is transforming the US economy. Yet our understanding of how patents and patent transactions support this innovation is limited, in part because of a lack of public information about patent licenses and sales. Claims about the patent marketplace, for example, extolling the virtues of intermediaries like non-practicing entities, or questioning the social utility of ex post patent licenses, tend not to be grounded in empirical evidence. This article brings much-needed data to the policy debate by analyzing transactional data from several proprietary databases of patent licenses and transfers, and reporting several novel findings. First I find that, despite …

Reach Out And Touch Someone: Reflections On The 25th Anniversary Of Feist Publications, Inc. V. Rural Telephone Service Co., Tyler T. Ochoa, Craig Joyce

Faculty Publications

2016 marks the 25th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., one of the Court’s landmark opinions in copyright law, and one that continues to define the standard of originality for copyrighted works in general and compilations of data in particular. The Feist case, however, was an unlikely candidate for landmark status. Only a handful of court opinions and academic authors had expressed dissatisfaction with the existing state of the law concerning originality and data compilations.scure sources which have enhanced greatly the pages that follow. Further, the Tenth Circuit’s opinion in Feist …

What Is A "Useful Article" In Copyright Law After Star Athletica?, Tyler T. Ochoa

Faculty Publications

In Star Athletica, LLC v, Varsity Brands, Inc., the Supreme Court decided the appropriate test to determine when a feature of a useful article is protectable under §101 of the Copyright Act. However, there is an antecedent question that must be answered first before the Supreme Court's two part test in Star Athetica may be invoked.

Brief Of Amici Curiae - 56 Professors Of Law And Economics In Support Of Petition For Writ Of Certiorari In Tc Heartland Llc V. Kraft Foods Group Brands Llc, No. 16-341, Colleen V. Chien, Mark Lemley, Brian Love, Arti K. Rai

Historical and Topical Legal Documents

28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business and has infringed the patent. This Court made clear in Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Prods. Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 223 (1957), that those were the only permissible venues for a patent case. But the Federal Circuit has rejected Fourco and the plain meaning of § 1400(b), instead permitting a patent plaintiff to file suit against a defendant anywhere there is personal jurisdiction over that defendant. The result has been rampant …

Inter Partes Review: Current Thinking On What, When, Why, And How Much, Brian Love

Faculty Publications

Slide deck from a presentation as part of the Merchant & Gould's CLE program on Inter Partes Review.

Predictably Expensive: A Critical Look At Patent Litigation In The Eastern District Of Texas, Brian Love

Faculty Publications

In this Essay, we compare U.S. patent litigation across districts and consider possible explanations for the Eastern District of Texas’s popularity with patent plaintiffs. Rather than any one explanation, we conclude that what makes the Eastern District so attractive to patent plaintiffs is the accumulated effect of several marginal advantages — particularly with respect to the relative timing of discovery deadlines, transfer decisions, and claim construction — that make it predictably expensive for accused infringers to defend patent suits filed in East Texas. These findings tend to support ongoing efforts to pass patent reform legislation that would presumptively stay discovery …

Comparative Patent Quality, Colleen Chien

Faculty Publications

One of the most urgent problems with the US patent system is that there are too many patents of poor quality. Most blame the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) – its mistakes, overly generous grant rate, and lack of consistency. But, the quality and quantity of patents in force is the product of three sets of decisions: to submit an application of certain quality (by the applicant), to grant the patent (by the patent office), and to renew a patent and keep it in force (by the applicant/patentee). Startling, there is no consensus way to measure patent quality. This …

Recalibrarting Patent Venue, Colleen V. Chien, Michael Risch

Faculty Publications

For most of patent law’s 200-year plus history, the rule has been that patentholders are permitted to sue defendants only in the district they inhabit. In 1990, the Federal Circuit changed this by enlarging the scope of permissible venue to all districts with personal jurisdiction over the defendant. Since then, patentees have flocked to fewer districts, and in 2015, brought more than 40% of their cases in a single rural district with 1% of the US population, the Eastern District of Texas. Fueled in particular by concerns that non-practicing entities (NPEs), who bring the majority of cases in the Eastern …

Comment To The Sec In Support Of The Enhanced Disclosure Of Patent And Technology License Information, Colleen Chien, Jorge L. Contreras, Carol Corrado, Stuart Graham, Deepak Hegde, Arti K. Rai, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Historical and Topical Legal Documents

Intangible assets like IP constitute a large share of the value of firms, and the US economy generally. Accurate information on the intellectual property (IP) holdings and transactions of publicly-traded firms facilitates price discovery in the market and reduces transaction costs. While public understanding of the innovation economy has been expanded by a large stream of empirical research using patent data, and more recently trademark information this research is only as good as the accuracy and completeness of the data it builds upon. In contrast with information about patents and trademarks, good information about IP licensing is much less publicly …

Capitol Records V. Redigi, United States District Court For The Southern District Of New York

Historical and Topical Legal Documents

No abstract provided.

Does The Us Patent System Need A Patent Small Claims Proceeding?, Colleen Chien, Michael J. Guo

Faculty Publications

Patent litigation is expensive. The primary motivation for the creation of a patent small claims proceeding is to make enforcement more affordable. However, in the twenty or so years since the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) first endorsed the idea of a small claims patent court through Resolution 401‐4, the patent litigation landscape has drastically changed. Although patent litigation costs are still high, the equities have shifted. The marketplace for patents has developed, providing more options than previously existed to monetize and assert patents. However, the cost of patent defense has not gone down, and small companies cannot afford …

Software Patents & Functional Claiming, Colleen Chien, Aashish Karkhanis

Faculty Publications

On Feb 12, 2013, the PTO held a roundtable about software patents at Stanford. Software patents have received a lot of attention and we don't believe it is undue: software patents are behind a disproportionate share of patent litigations -- more specifically, over half (55%) of all patent defendants and 82% of PAE ("patent troll") defendants are there because of a software patent, applying the Graham-Vishnubhakat definition to data provided by RPX Corporation. In this presentation, we more rigorously apply 35 USC 112(f) in accordance with the proposal Mark Lemley outlines in his WIRED oped "Let's Go Back to Claiming …

Masck V. Sports Illustrated, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Michigan

Historical and Topical Legal Documents

No abstract provided.

The Patent Remedy Dynamic [Georgetown-Stanford Conference], Colleen Chien

Faculty Publications

Panel discussion on the NPEs, patent damages, including review of expert testimony, the effect of RAND and other policies on standard-setting cases at the ITC and in district courts, and other patent remedy issues.

Patent Insurance/Collective Approaches To Managing Patent Risk, Colleen Chien

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Ap V. Meltwater, United States District Court For The Southern District Of New York

Historical and Topical Legal Documents

No abstract provided.

Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 2 - Declaration Of Margret M. Caruso (Counsel For Google), Margret Caruso

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Google's Opposition To Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Google

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xxii, Tab 59 - Ex. 3 - Declaration Of Kris Brewer (Counsel For Google), Kris Brewer

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Response To Google's Objections To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Declaration Of Jennifer L. Spaziano In Support Of Rosetta Stone's Motion For Sanctions, Jennifer Spaziano

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xvi, Tab 53 - Declaration Of Henry Lien In Support Of Google's Reply Memorandum (Counsel For Google), Henry Lien

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Xix, Tab 56 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?