Tag >> Decision
IPwatchdog reported the news that Kodak filed a lawsuit against Apple for infringement on patents held by Kodak and used in iPhone, iPod, Mac, etc..
News reports also indicate that Kodak has sued Research in Motion (RIM), maker of the Blackberry. The purpose of such cases is not simply related to the protection of patents. Most large corporations began to use their intellectual property as a competitive weapon to help in the battle for market leadership.
Much of similar lawsuits ended with agreements between the parties with the goal of everyone is happy.
For example, one hypothesis is when the market position of a company A is threatened by another company B that owns the new technology, while A holds intellectual property, parts of which may be used in the products of company B, company A
IPwatchdog reported the news that Kodak filed a lawsuit against Apple for infringement on patents held by Kodak and used in iPhone, iPod, Mac, etc..
News reports also indicate that Kodak has sued Research in Motion (RIM), maker of the Blackberry. The purpose of such cases is not simply related to the protection of patents. Most large corporations began to use their intellectual property as a competitive weapon to help in the battle for market leadership.
Much of similar lawsuits ended with agreements between the parties with the goal of everyone is happy.
For example, one hypothesis is when the market position of a company A is threatened by another company B that owns the new technology, while A holds intellectual property, parts of which may be used in the products of company B, company A
Posted by: Ventsi Ventsi in Patent search, patent, MIcrosoft, law, IP litigation, Internet Patent, intellectual property, Decision, copyright, business, blogging on
Jan 14, 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals issued a decision on the case between software giant Microsoft and the Canadian company i4i Inc.
This case concerning a claim by i4i Inc., that Microsoft infringed its patent for a software format XML.
According to the court decision Microsoft must stop selling Word and any other Office 2007 products, which contain the form XML. Moreover, U.S. giant must pay compensation amounting to 290 million dollars.
This means for Microsoft, in order to continue the sale of the Word in the future, should remove the options for storage in formats. XML,. DOCX, or. DOCM, which contain XML.
Intellectual Property Planet
Posted by: Ventsi Ventsi in Patent search, patent, MIcrosoft, law, IP litigation, Internet Patent, intellectual property, Decision, copyright, business, blogging on
Jan 14, 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals issued a decision on the case between software giant Microsoft and the Canadian company i4i Inc.
This case concerning a claim by i4i Inc., that Microsoft infringed its patent for a software format XML.
According to the court decision Microsoft must stop selling Word and any other Office 2007 products, which contain the form XML. Moreover, U.S. giant must pay compensation amounting to 290 million dollars.
This means for Microsoft, in order to continue the sale of the Word in the future, should remove the options for storage in formats. XML,. DOCX, or. DOCM, which contain XML.
Intellectual Property Planet
In the In Re Bilski case, the US Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit has made a decision about what it takes for a process claim to be patentable. On October 30, 2008, the United States Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit has made a much anticipated decision in a case concerning a business method patent, the so-called In Re Bilski case. The decision is expected to be of vital importance to the validity of process claims in general, but especially to software/computer-implemented processes and business methods. Concurrently with the fact that the decision tightens up the conditions for getting approved typically software patents and business method patents, at any rate it also verifies that it is possible to patent that kind of things at all. The decision discusses what it takes
Posted by: Miriam Hackmey in well-known marks, Well Known Marks, Trademarks, trademark, Trade Marks, Lawsuits, law, Israel, famous marks, Decision on
Jul 02, 2008
"Local" VERSACE registrations removed from Israeli Trade Mark Register
In a recent decision dated 29 June 2008, the Israeli Intellectual Property Adjudicator ordered the removal from the register of five registrations in respect of the trade mark Versace in various forms including Hebrew versions of the mark. The registrations were almost 20 years old.
The Israeli proprietor of the removed registrations, Versace 83 Ltd. owned by the Zadik Fur Bros., obtained the registrations at the time after the well known Italian fashion house Gianni Versace S.p.A. withdrew its oppositions. Since 2000, following the expansion of the Israeli "VERSACE" chain and the opening of many branches in prime locations, Gianni Versace S.p.A. took various actions in order to stop the commercial use of the mark and
Microsoft appealed an earlier jury verdict dated last April, maintaining that Microsoft has infringed a number of Alcatel-Lucent's patents. On Appeal, Judge Marilyn L. Huff refused to reconsider the April jury verdict and ordered Microsoft to pay for additional damages.
Reckitt & Colman (referred to hereinafter as "the applicants") tried to register a trademark that goes by the Hebrew name of " ???? ????? ??? ????" which is translated as "A bladeless shaving kit". The applicants already own another trademark named "Bladeless Razor" registered abroad. The Patents and Trademarks Commissioner (referred to hereinafter as "the Commissioner") rejected their request claiming the trademark is "non-distinctive". In response, the applicants have carried out a survey and showed that many customers use their product; a wide publicity of their product under the Hebrew name of "Bladeless Shaving Kit" in Israel proving
|
|
|
|
 |
Partners |
 |
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
