Sorry everyone for the long time since the last post. Unfortunately, I got caught up with final exams and our capstone IP audit.
Now that the craziness is over, I should get back to posting news of the week on Tuesdays and Fridays.
Ever more inventive (via The Economist)
Takeaway: a new WIPO study scrutinises Chinese patents and concludes that a small but rapidly growing proportion are up to world standards. Additionally, three of the top five patent spots are held by divisions of Foxconn.
“The findings challenge conventional wisdom in several ways. Not only do they show that the number of Chinese patents filed abroad is rising sharply (see chart). They also show that, since 2003, most of these have been invention patents, not utility-model ones.”
The Great Smartphone War (via Vanity Fair)
Takeaway: a great piece that explains the story behind the Apple and Samsung patent battle. Lots of info about Samsung’s record of patent infringement and Steve Jobs.
“Steve Jobs, Apple’s mercurial chief executive, was furious. His teams had toiled for years creating a breakthrough phone, and now, Jobs fumed, a competitor—an Apple supplier no less!—had stolen the design and many features.”
Supreme Court Makes Induced Infringement Harder To Prove (Law360, subscription required)
Takeaway: induced infringement can be found only when one party performs every step of a patent.
“”When Congress wishes to impose liability for inducing activity that does not itself constitute direct infringement, it knows precisely how to do so,” the court wrote in an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito. “The courts should not create liability for inducement of noninfringing conduct where Congress has elected not to extend that concept.””
High Court Clears Way For More Challenges To Vague Patents (Law360, subscription required)
Takeaway: new rule from SCOTUS, only prove that patent fair to inform by “reasonable certainty” to invalidate patents for being overly vague.
“The Federal Circuit has long held that patents can only be found indefinite if they are “insolubly ambiguous,” but the high court concluded that accused infringers must only prove that the patent fails to inform a person skilled in the art about the scope of the invention “with reasonable certainty.“”
Takeaway: this is the first time the US has formally accused another nation of economic espionage.
“The indictment also lists six companies that allegedly had secrets stolen: Alcoa (aluminum), Westinghouse (nuclear energy), SolarWorld (solar energy), US Steel, Allegheny Technologies Incorporated (metals), and the US Steelworkers Union. Secrets stolen included pricing, cost, strategy, and plant designs.”
5 Recent Fed. Circ. Rulings IP Attys Need To Know (Law360, subscription required)
Felix Salmon on the Economics of Online Content (via Ben Casnocha)