This week on The Briefing by the IP Law Blog, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss the copyright lawsuit over a Black Mirror episode starring Miley Cyrus, the plot of which filmmaker Geoffrey Blair Hajim said was lifted from his film “Strange Frame: Love and Sax.” Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Space Erotica Flick Not Infringed by Black Mirror
Over the past few weeks, there have been a number of news articles and stories about police officers playing popular music during a citizen/officer interaction that is being filmed by the citizen. For example, Vice reported on a Beverly Hills police officer breaking out his phone and playing over a minute of Sublime’s “Santeria” when the officer discovered that his interaction with a well-known LA-area activist was being live-streamed by the citizen via Instagram. Similarly, Mashable reported that an Alameda County Sheriff’s deputy played a Taylor Swift song during an encounter. Why is this happening? There seems to be a belief that police service, when paired with a musical interlude, will prevent a recording of the interaction from being posted on social media due to algorithms that detect and remove videos incorporating copyrighted music (among other types of content).
In recent years, the Supreme Court has decided a number of cases, including Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad, and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, which involve the limits on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. For example, in Alice, the court stated “[t]he ‘abstract ideas’ category embodies the longstanding rule that an idea of itself is not patentable.” The Supreme Court further recognized that “laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas” are not patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101.
To determine whether claims are patent-eligible the Supreme Court set forth a two-part test in Mayo as further explained in Alice. This test consists of the following steps:
In this week’s episode of The Briefing by The IP Law Blog, attorneys Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss the trademark litigation between Nike and a custom shoe maker, MSCHF (pronounced “Mischief”). In Nike Inc. v MSCHF Product Studio, Inc., Nike sued MSCHF over unauthorized versions of the Nike Air Max 97 featuring satanic imagery. The shoes were tied into marketing by Rapper Lil Nas X, and all 666 pairs created by MSCHF were sold. Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Nike Threatens Fire & Brimstone Over Satanic Custom Shoe Makers
Loud parties, surveillance cameras, and a neighbor dispute? The Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District in California was recently faced with these issues in a case involving claims that one neighbor’s use of surveillance cameras violated the other neighbor’s right to privacy. The fact that one of the defendants was comedian, Kathy Griffin, only added to the case’s interest. In the end, the Court sided with Ms. Griffin and her boyfriend in the case: Mezger v. Bick, et al. (decided July 1, 2021).
Continue Reading What Happens in Your Backyard Doesn’t Always Stay in Your Backyard
