IP

IP Recap - 8/07/19

IP Recap - 8/07/19

Startups facing patent litigation should be aware of recent, positive developments in patent venue law. This area of law dictates where a patentee-plaintiff can file an infringement lawsuit, and requires that a startup (or any company) can only be sued in a location (judicial district) where it has sufficient presence. Importantly, recent legal developments restrict parties—including patent assertion entities (PAEs), sometimes referred to as “patent trolls”—from suing startups in far-flung, plaintiff-friendly judicial districts. This levels the playing field in abusive patent litigation and benefits startups, who should no longer be required to defend litigation far from “home.” 

CASE Act does not offer viable solution to online infringement

CASE Act does not offer viable solution to online infringement

The Senate Judiciary Committee is taking up a bill today that would change copyright enforcement in the U.S. and open up startups and their users to new risks. The bill, the CASE Act (S.1273), would create a process for copyright holders to address online copyright infringement by establishing a Copyright Claims Board within the U.S. Copyright Office to adjudicate copyright infringement and award substantial financial damages without the traditional safeguards of federal court. 

Engine Submits Comments on Section 101 to Senate Judiciary Subcommittee

Engine Submits Comments on Section 101 to Senate Judiciary Subcommittee

The Subcommittee on Intellectual Property of the Senate Judiciary Committee recently held a series of hearings on the topic of patent subject matter eligibility. That Subcommittee is considering potential amendments to 35 U.S.C. §101—the provision of the Patent Act that defines what subject matter is (and is not) eligible for patent protection. In our view changes to 35 U.S.C. §101 are not needed, and we submitted comments to the Subcommittee articulating our concerns. 

Engine Weighs in on Section 512 Study

Engine Weighs in on Section 512 Study

Earlier this week, Engine representatives participated in the U.S. Copyright Office’s Roundtable discussion on the impact and effectiveness of section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA—and the safe harbor provisions of the bill included in section 512— provide a framework to grant online service providers limited liability protections for copyright infringement stemming from user-generated content.

Statement on USPTO Director Iancu’s Speech to the Eastern District of Texas Bar Association

Statement on USPTO Director Iancu’s Speech to the Eastern District of  Texas Bar Association

Last week, United States Patent and Trademark Office Director Andrei Iancu gave a speech to the Eastern District of Texas Bar Association, where he implied that patent trolls were not a real problem faced by innovators, but instead just a “narrative” made up to scare away innovators. Not only is this factually inaccurate, but it is troubling that Director Iancu would ignore the overwhelming data showing that low-quality patents have led to a rash of abusive patent litigation directed towards small companies and entrepreneurs over the past decade.

Panel Round-Up: Design Patents and Defining the Article of Manufacture

Panel Round-Up: Design Patents and Defining the Article of Manufacture

The panel discussion, “Design Patents and Defining the Article of Manufacture – One Year Later,” was moderated by Julie Samuels, President of the Board at Engine Advocacy and Executive Director at Tech:NYC. The expert panel also featured Charles Duan, Senior Fellow and Associate Director of Tech and Innovation Policy at R Street Institute; G. Nagesh Rao, a 2016 USA Eisenhower Fellow and former Patent Examiner and Senior Policy Advisor at the USPTO; and Matthew Levy, former Patent Counsel at the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA).

2017 Year in Review: Patents

2017 Year in Review: Patents

While patent trolls remain a problem, in 2017, startups started to see some relief from nefarious patent litigation. The decrease in patent litigation abuse stems largely from meaningful Supreme Court rulings and the continued implementation of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).