Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Evidence Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law

Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 271 - 300 of 320

Full-Text Articles in Evidence

Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone Apr 2010

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?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 44 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone Apr 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 44 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 45 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, Rosetta Stone Apr 2010

Vol. Ix, Tab 45 - Rosetta Stone's Opposition To Google's Motion For Summary Judgment, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 4 - Plaintiff Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Rule 26(A)(1) Disclosures, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone Mar 2010

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 3 - Rosetta Stone's Supplemental Response To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 5 - Deposition Of Rose Hagan (Former Google Managing Counsel - Trademarks, Jewelry Maker), Rose Hagan Mar 2010

Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 5 - Deposition Of Rose Hagan (Former Google Managing Counsel - Trademarks, Jewelry Maker), Rose Hagan

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?

Go to article

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia Feb 2010

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia

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?

Go to article

Retribution And The Experience Of Punishment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, J. Bronsteen, J. Masur Jan 2010

Retribution And The Experience Of Punishment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, J. Bronsteen, J. Masur

All Faculty Scholarship

In a prior article, we argued that punishment theorists need to take into account the counterintuitive findings from hedonic psychology about how offenders typically experience punishment. Punishment generally involves the imposition of negative experience. The reason that greater fines and prison sentences constitute more severe punishments than lesser ones is, in large part, that they are assumed to impose greater negative experience. Hedonic adaptation reduces that difference in negative experience, thereby undermining efforts to achieve proportionality in punishment. Anyone who values punishing more serious crimes more severely than less serious crimes by an appropriate amount - as virtually everyone does …

Go to article

Valuing Intellectual Property: An Experiment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, C. Sprigman Jan 2010

Valuing Intellectual Property: An Experiment, Christopher J. Buccafusco, C. Sprigman

All Faculty Scholarship

In this article we report on the results of an experiment we performed to determine whether transactions in intellectual property (IP) are subject to the valuation anomalies commonly referred to as “endowment effects”. Traditional conceptions of the value of IP rely on assumptions about human rationality derived from classical economics. The law assumes that when people make decisions about buying, selling, and licensing IP they do so with fixed, context-independent preferences. Over the past several decades, this rational actor model of classical economics has come under attack by behavioral data showing that people do not always make strictly rational decisions. …

Go to article

Welfare As Happiness (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco Jan 2010

Welfare As Happiness (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco

All Faculty Scholarship

Perhaps the most important goal of law and policy is improving people’s lives. But what constitutes improvement? What is quality of life, and how can it be measured? In previous articles, we have used insights from the new field of hedonic psychology to analyze central questions in civil and criminal justice, and we now apply those insights to a broader inquiry: how can the law make life better? The leading accounts of human welfare in law, economics, and philosophy are preference-satisfaction - getting what one wants - and objective list approaches - possessing an enumerated set of capabilities. This Article …

Go to article

Vol. Xvii, Tab 54 - Google's Reply Motion In Further Support Of Its Motion For Summary Judgment, Google Jan 2010

Vol. Xvii, Tab 54 - Google's Reply Motion In Further Support Of Its Motion For Summary Judgment, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's First Request For The Production Of Documents From Google, Rosetta Stone Jan 2010

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's First Request For The Production Of Documents From Google, 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?

Go to article

Vol. Xviii, Tab 55 - Google's Reply Memorandum Of Law In Further Support Of Its Motion To Exclude The Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, Google Jan 2010

Vol. Xviii, Tab 55 - Google's Reply Memorandum Of Law In Further Support Of Its Motion To Exclude The Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, 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?

Go to article

Distribution, I Presume: A Role For Presumptions In Establishing The "Making Available" Right, Joe Weissman Jan 2010

Distribution, I Presume: A Role For Presumptions In Establishing The "Making Available" Right, Joe Weissman

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's Answers To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone Dec 2009

Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's Answers To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, 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?

Go to article

The Burden Of Establishing Patent Invalidity: Maintaining A Heightened Evidentiary Standard Despite Increasing "Verbal Variances", Etan S. Chatlynne Sep 2009

The Burden Of Establishing Patent Invalidity: Maintaining A Heightened Evidentiary Standard Despite Increasing "Verbal Variances", Etan S. Chatlynne

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Vol. Ix, Tab 43 - Google Memorandum In Support Of Its Motion To Exclude Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, Google Apr 2009

Vol. Ix, Tab 43 - Google Memorandum In Support Of Its Motion To Exclude Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, 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?

Go to article

Happiness And Punishment (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco Jan 2009

Happiness And Punishment (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco

All Faculty Scholarship

This article continues our project to apply groundbreaking new literature on the behavioral psychology of human happiness to some of the most deeply analyzed questions in law. Here we explain that the new psychological understandings of happiness interact in startling ways with the leading theories of criminal punishment. Punishment theorists, both retributivist and utilitarian, have failed to account for human beings' ability to adapt to changed circumstances, including fines and (surprisingly) imprisonment. At the same time, these theorists have largely ignored the severe hedonic losses brought about by the post-prison social and economic deprivations (unemployment, divorce, and disease) caused by …

Go to article

Vol. Xiv, Tab 51 - Google's Objection To Evidence And Motion To Strike, Google Jan 2009

Vol. Xiv, Tab 51 - Google's Objection To Evidence And Motion To Strike, 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?

Go to article

Introduction: Contains Cover, Table Of Contents, Letter From The Editor, And Masthead, Jessica M. Yoke Jan 2009

Introduction: Contains Cover, Table Of Contents, Letter From The Editor, And Masthead, Jessica M. Yoke

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

The Richmond Journal of Law and Technology is proud to present the third issue of the 2008–2009 academic school year, which also is our Annual Survey on E-Discovery.

Go to article

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 16 - Plaintiff's Opposition To Defendant's Motion For Clarification And Brief In Support (American Airlines V. Google), American Airlines Jul 2008

Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 16 - Plaintiff's Opposition To Defendant's Motion For Clarification And Brief In Support (American Airlines V. Google), American Airlines

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?

Go to article

Hedonic Adaptation And The Settlement Of Civil Lawsuits (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco Jan 2008

Hedonic Adaptation And The Settlement Of Civil Lawsuits (With J. Bronsteen & J. Masur), Christopher J. Buccafusco

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper examines the burgeoning psychological literature on happiness and hedonic adaptation (a person's capacity to preserve or recapture her level of happiness by adjusting to changed circumstances), bringing this literature to bear on a previously overlooked aspect of the civil litigation process: the probability of pre-trial settlement. The glacial pace of civil litigation is commonly thought of as a regrettable source of costs to the relevant parties. Even relatively straightforward personal injury lawsuits can last for as long as two years, delaying the arrival of necessary redress to the tort victim and forcing the litigants to expend ever greater …

Go to article

Bilcare, Ksr, Presumptions Of Validity, Preliminary Relief, And Obviousness In Patent Law, Joshua D. Sarnoff Jan 2008

Bilcare, Ksr, Presumptions Of Validity, Preliminary Relief, And Obviousness In Patent Law, Joshua D. Sarnoff

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Go to article

On The Legal Consequences Of Sauces: Should Thomas Keller's Recipes Be Per Se Copyrightable?, Christopher J. Buccafusco Jan 2007

On The Legal Consequences Of Sauces: Should Thomas Keller's Recipes Be Per Se Copyrightable?, Christopher J. Buccafusco

All Faculty Scholarship

The restaurant industry now takes in over $500 billion a year, but recent courts have been skeptical of the notion that one of its most valuable assets, original recipes, are subject to copyright protection. With more litigation looming and the contours of the debate insufficiently mapped out, this article establishes the appropriate groundwork for analyzing the copyrightability of recipes. I show that, contrary to recent appellate court opinions, recipes meet the statutory requirements for copyrightability. I argue, by analogizing to musical compositions, that written recipes work to satisfy the fixation requirement of copyright law just as musical notation does for …

Go to article

Adverse To What?: The Increasing Value Of Patent Opinions After Knorr-Bremse, Matthew Leary Jan 2007

Adverse To What?: The Increasing Value Of Patent Opinions After Knorr-Bremse, Matthew Leary

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Go to article

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp Oct 2006

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Go to article

Are Patented Research Tools Still Valuable? Use, Intent, And A Rebuttable Presumption: A Proposed Modification For Analyzing The Exemption From Patent Infringement Under 35 Usc 271 (E) (1), Vihar R. Patel Jul 2006

Are Patented Research Tools Still Valuable? Use, Intent, And A Rebuttable Presumption: A Proposed Modification For Analyzing The Exemption From Patent Infringement Under 35 Usc 271 (E) (1), Vihar R. Patel

ExpressO

Briefly, the article proposes to have courts focus on the nature of an individual's use and apply the "UART" (Use As a Research Tool) factors to determine if a patented invention is being used as a research tool. If a patented invention is being used as a research tool, then the court is to presume that the activities are not covered by the FDA exemption. However, this presumption can be rebutted by a researcher's demonstration of the research tool owner using his patent to block efforts to develop a competing product. If the presumption is rebutted, then the court applies …

Go to article

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp Jun 2006

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

This brief comment suggests where the anti-eminent domain movement might be heading next.

Go to article

Zoning And Eminent Domain Under The New Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp May 2006

Zoning And Eminent Domain Under The New Minimum Scrutiny, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

Recently the Supreme Court has made it clearer that minimum scrutiny is a factual analysis. Whether in any government action there is a rational relation to a legitimate interest is a matter of determining whether there is a policy maintaining important facts. This has come about in the Court’s emerging emphasis on developing fact-based criteria for determining government purpose. Thus, those who want to affect zoning and eminent domain outcomes should look to what the Court sees as important facts, and whether government action is maintaining those facts with its proposed land use or eminent domain action.

Go to article

A Duty Everlasting: The Perils Of Applying Traditional Doctrines Of Spoliation To Electronic Discovery, Michael R. Nelson, Mark H. Rosenberg Jan 2006

A Duty Everlasting: The Perils Of Applying Traditional Doctrines Of Spoliation To Electronic Discovery, Michael R. Nelson, Mark H. Rosenberg

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding electronic discovery are expected to take effect on December 1, 2006. These amendments are designed to alleviate the burden, expense and uncertainty that has resulted from the application of traditional discovery principles in the electronic age. These principles worked well in an era where discovery was primarily limited to the production of paper documentation, but have proved unworkable when applied to the discovery of electronic data, particularly in the “corporate world,” where even the most routine business discussions are captured in electronic format.5

Go to article

First Prev Next Last