Newsletter- June 2016

IP Update, June 2016

  • Software inventions that improve computer functionality stand a better chance of passing the Supreme Court’s patent-eligibility test than software that merely implements well-known business practices. More. . .
  • Due to the broad reach of assignor estoppel, a company that sells a patent will often be barred from challenging its validity if the company is later sued for infringing that patent. More. . .
  • The Supreme Court has changed the calculus for litigants, making it easier for patentees who win at trial to recover enhanced damages, up to triple the amount awarded for infringement. More. . .
  • In inter partes reviews (IPRs), the parties must be given the chance to argue the validity of a challenged patent claim in the wake of any new claim construction that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board develops during the course of the proceeding. More. . .
  • Google copied 170 lines of Oracle’s code to enable the operability of Android apps on the popular Java platform. A jury has decided this was fair use under copyright laws. More. . .
  • The First Circuit has adapted a VCR-era statute to protect the privacy of mobile phone subscribers. More. . .
  • A trial court decision casts doubt on the value to retailers of “comprehensive” cybersecurity insurance policies. Some expensive consequences of a security breach may not be covered. More. . .