Scott Hervey was quoted in a March 23, 2007 story on Internetnews.com about Oracle accusing SAP of "Massive" Theft in a complaint filed with California’s Northern District Court in San Francisco. Oracle accused the German software company of engaging in "systematic, illegal access" to its computer support systems in November and December 2006 and January 2007.
For the complete article, click here.
United States courts should not adjudicate rights under foreign patents, according to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. In an interesting case, the court was divided over whether a district court could decide infringement of a foreign patent. Voda v. Cordis Corporation, 476 F.3d 887 (February 1, 2007).
The plaintiff, Voda, owned several U.S. and foreign patents covering guiding catheters used in interventional cardiology. The plaintiff sued defendant, Cordis Corporation, a U.S. entity, in the Western District of Oklahoma for infringement of three U.S. patents. Cordis denied infringement and alleged invalidity.
Continue Reading U.S. Courts Should Not Decide Foreign Patent Infringement
Scott Hervey, Partner, Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Tobin & Tobin, and Mike Rodenbaugh, Senior Legal Director, Yahoo! Inc. presented "Protecting Brands in the Legally Tangled World of Keyword Advertising" at American Conference Institute’s Corporate Counsel Forum on E-Marketing and Privacy Law on March 19, 2007 in Las Vegas, Nevada. To view the presentation, click below.
When can you knowingly republish defamatory statements without risk of liability? When you do so on the Internet.
The California Supreme Court, in Barrett v. Rosenthal (November 2006) 40 Cal.App.4th 33, followed the line of federal cases interpreting the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) to find broad immunity for both Internet service providers and users of an interactive computer service for republishing defamatory statements.
In January 2007, the Ninth Circuit adopted the long-standing policy of the Patent Trade Office’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board that “use in commerce only creates trademark rights when the use is lawful.” This case, CreAgri, Inc. v. USANA Health Sciences, Inc., arose out of competing trademark claims brought by two manufacturers of a dietary supplement.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Adopts Lawful “Use in Commerce” Requirement for Trade Mark Priority
