Justice Dept. Seeks Details On Google Deal – washingtonpost.com

Justice Dept. Seeks Details On Google Deal – washingtonpost.com.

After several years of fighting a large copyright issue, the GOOGLE v. Publishers and Authors suit settled out for about $125 million. The deal they struck is that GOOGLE gets to continue putting together its online library and the publishers and authors go away compensated for their copyright interests.

It turns out that it’s not that easy. In comes the US Justice Department. The DOJ is investigating the GOOGLE/publishers-and-authors deal with an eye toward finding an antitrust violation hidden somewhere in that deal.

It is true that the deal would make GOOGLE the leading online source of books — after all, it ain’t Yahoo scanning in those millions of titles from the large repositories. However, there is nothing that I know of in the deal to prevent Yahoo, or anyone else, from also reaching a deal with the authors and publishers and scanning in the works to compete with GOOGLE; GOOGLE just happens to be the first kid on the block to come up with this notion. This is a deal that was reached between these particular litigants to allow a project that could be of significant benefit to the whole world to go forward.

Now, I’m sure there’s something here that I don’t know about, but antitrust? Where’s the restraint of trade?

New top-level domains could cause .trademark chaos

New top-level domains could cause .trademark chaos | Media | guardian.co.uk .

ICANN is planning to do something very strange next year.

We’re all used to .com, .net, .info and the rest of the top-level domains (“TLD”) by now. Well, watch out, world — here come the branded TLDs!! We’ll soon see .ibm, .3m, .delain-law-office. All you need is the $185,000 (a bit more than spare change to a small business person) to purchase the TLD name (which is why you WON’T see .delain-law-office).

As a trademark lawyer who spends time extracting clients from unintended second-level domain name infringements, I can see the trademark knots coming down the pike. Not only will second-level domains get squatted; TLDs will get squatted and sold for $millions. 

Amazing. And utterly confusing. Not a good move, ICANN.

Small world…


If the YouTube embedded video does not show up, here’s the URL.

The Rule of Six never ceases to amaze me. You know, the one that says that there are only six degrees of separation between every living human being on the planet.

Shortly after I posted the new US Supreme Court nominee mention, I got a FaceBook message from the mother of one of my daughter’s college friends telling me that the Judge Sotomayor’s brother is my friend’s allergist.

I do think an introduction is in order here.

Sotomayor nominated to high court

Sonia Sotomayor nominated to high court — first Hispanic – Yahoo News.

So. US Supreme Court Justice David Souter has a potential successor. A female, brainy, bipartisan appellate judge (who was first appointed to the federal bench by President Bush I and appointed to the federal appellate bench by President Clinton) with lots of judicial experience (this is Good) who has a rip-roaring case of juvenile diabetes (this is not so good).

I like her as a potential Supreme Court Justice (the first Hispanic and the third woman in the history of the Court); she’s careful, not flashy and keeps her views to the case at hand, but I wonder how the rigors of life among the Nine Wise Ones will wear on a fragile system. Well, assuming she’s appointed (and appointment, while likely, ain’t certain; she has her detractors on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who are throwing around phrases like “judicial activist with her own agenda”), we shall see.

Congratulations, Judge Sotomayor. May your decisions be sound for a long time to come.

And thank you, Justice Souter, for waiting to retire until after Mr. Obama was sworn in!!!!!

Are you dead? Your IP isn't

Albert Einstein, who died in 1955, earned $18 million last year.

Charles M. Schulz, whose PEANUTS characters live on in syndicated reprints, earned even more.

Ted Geisel, who will live forever in his timeless Cat in the Hat and Lorax and Sneetches and wacky machinery, earned more yet.

We all know you can’t take it with you, but you can keep earning it even when you’re not here to earn it. Well, not you, but the value of your intellectual property can carry on after you go gently into that good night.

Thus, if you’re the owner of any intellectual property at all, you need to bother protecting it. Whether you benefit from the protection personally or not, your heirs may very well benefit from it.

If the copyright in your work of authorship isn’t registered, register it. It costs $45 in the US, plus the time to fill in the Copyright Office’s #$% form if you do it yourself; it’s a bit more expensive to hire an attorney to do this for you, but you stand a better chance of successfully battling off any challenge that the Copyright Office might mount to your registration.

If the trademark that you’ve been using to designate your goods or services in commerce isn’t registered, register it. This is more involved than is copyright registration and you really should have an attorney do this for you.

While we pay lip service to the common-law rights of an intellectual property owner, registration of intellectual property rights provides significantly — SIGNFICANTLY — more and better protection.

IP can be passed on to another by will. You need to work with your attorney who handles your will and estate in concert with your attorney who handles intellectual property matters (and these are probably two different lawyers) to properly protect and pass on your IP. Your IP is a valuable part of your estate and needs to be treated every bit as decisively as does the dining room table or the computer or the … whatever.

After all, Einstein earned $18 million last year for his estate; why shouldn’t you do that after you’re gone?

Twitter Weekly Updates for 2009-05-03

Powered by Twitter Tools.

McDonald's loses trademark battle in Malaysia


 
McDonald’s loses trademark battle in Malaysia — chicagotribune.com.

Bad news for the home of the Big Mac. As described in this article from the Chicago Tribune, Malaysia does not view “Mc…” as associated with restaurants and food as a prefix to the intellectual property of McDonald’s Corporation. 

Unlike the United States, which forced the closure of McBagels based on the use of “Mc…” in the food industry being deemed confusingly similar to McDonald’s famous mark, Malaysia has held that McCurry, ostensibly an abbreviation for “Malaysian Chicken Curry” is not rendered confusingly similar to McDonald’s famous mark merely by the addition of the “Mc” prefix.

I don’t know about anyone else, but when I hear that “Mc” in association with food, I immediately think of McDonald’s. I wonder what the Malaysian court thinks of? Actually, I wonder what they were thinking of?