By Audrey Millemann

In Prasco, LLC v. Medicis Pharmaceutical Corp., 2008 WL 3546217 (Fed. Cir. 2008), the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has further limited the test for subject matter jurisdiction in declaratory judgment actions. The court held that the test, previously expanded by the Supreme Court in MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 127 S.Ct. 764 (2007), requires affirmative actions by the patent owner to establish a case or controversy satisfying Article III. 

Continue Reading Federal Circuit Further Refines Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction

By Dale C. Campbell

A copyright holder has the right to specify the terms under which others may use his or her work. How the terms under which a third party may use a copyrighted work are described can dramatically affect the remedies available to the copyright holder when the terms are breached.

Continue Reading LICENSE TERMS: CONDITIONS OR COVENANTS – WHY YOU SHOULD CARE

By James Kachmar

Last summer, I wrote about the appellate court’s decision in VL Systems, Inc. v. Unison, Inc. in which the Court struck down a “no hire” provision contained in a consulting agreement as violating section 16600 of California’s Business and Professions Code. Section 16600 provides “Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind is to that extent void.” This summer, the California Supreme Court in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen used the same reasoning to strike down a “non-competition” provision in an employment agreement.

Continue Reading Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP The Death of Non-Competition Agreements?

By Jeffrey Pietsch

eBay let out a sigh of relief last month when a New York Federal Court ruled that eBay’s efforts to remove sellers of counterfeit goods was sufficient to combat the sale of fake Tiffany & Co. products. In fact, the court held that trademark holders, such as Tiffany & Co., are the ones responsible for policing the online market place for counterfeit products, not online “swap meets” such as eBay.

Continue Reading Tiffany v. eBay: eBay Not Responsible for Counterfeit Goods

By Scott Cameron

The United States Government, which created the courts and a legal system to provide an avenue to seek redress for injury, is immune from suit in that system unless the Government agrees to be sued by waiving its immunity. This is commonly known as “sovereign immunity,” and allows many lawsuits to be dismissed at the pleading stage. On July 25, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion regarding the scope of sovereign immunity as applied in a copyright infringement case. 

The Federal Government has waived its immunity for suits based on its infringing the rights of copyright owners. It is a rather limited waiver, however, and allows the Government to infringe much more freely than a private party. Last week’s Federal Circuit decision, Blueport Co., LLC v. United States, shows how easy it can be for a government employee to lose his rights to work he has created.

Continue Reading We’re the Government, and We’re Here to Copy – Blueport Co. v. United States