Intellectual Property Law Decisions: Decided
Decided - The FindLaw Noteworthy Decisions and Settlements Blog

Recently in Intellectual Property Law Category

The Batmobile is one of the most recognizable cars in the world. The fins, the gadgets, the weaponry: all singular to the Caped Crusader, and all very inviting to copycats.

But those looking to steal the Batmobile's signature look better beware. The 9th Circuit has ruled that Batman's costar car is sufficiently distinctive to warrant copyright protections.

Redskins owner Dan Snyder claims, "I will never change the name." Well, he may want to consider doing it now.

A federal judge ruled against the team today when he ordered that the Redskins' trademark registrations be canceled.

Nike Settles With Ralph Lauren Over Chuck Taylor Knock-Offs

Back in October, Nike, which owns Converse, sued 31 companies for manufacturing knock-off versions of those famous "Chuck Taylor" Converse All-Star shoes. You're seen them before: the canvas high-tops with the big star on the ankle.

You've also probably seen the knock-offs, which come dangerously close to looking just like Converse's Chuck Taylors. Well, yesterday, at least one company -- Ralph Lauren -- settled its dispute with Nike. Just 30 more to go!

Snapchat OKs Settlement With Ousted Co-Founder

In a statement suspiciously timed to coincide with the media coverage of Apple's new product launch, Snapchat quietly announced Tuesday that it's settled a lawsuit filed against the company by one of its founders.

Although the terms of the settlement weren't disclosed, Snapchat was recently valued at $10 billion following a round of venture capital fundraising, reports Forbes, making it likely that the settlement of the lawsuit by ousted co-founder Reggie Brown didn't come cheap.

What was Brown's beef with his former Stanford frat brothers and company co-founders Even Spiegel and Bobby Murphy?

The U.S. Supreme Court released two impactful opinions on Wednesday, potentially changing how the nation treats streaming broadcast TV and warrantless cell-phone searches by police.

In American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo, the High Court determined that an online streaming service which allowed users to watch over-the-air broadcast TV on their computers and mobile devices violated copyright law. Meantime, mobile users have been given a bit more protection under Riley v. California, holding that police may not generally search a cell phone after arrest without a warrant.

Let's break down both Supreme Court cases.

Patent Office Nixes Redskins Trademarks: 5 Key Questions Tackled

The United States Patent and Trademark Office made big news today when it issued an order canceling six trademarks held by the Washington Redskins.

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ruling is just latest twist in the ongoing, multi-decade push by Native American groups and their allies to get the team to change a name that they consider offensive.

So what does this ruling really mean for the Redskins? Let's tackle five key questions about today's Patent Office decision:

What Is Net Neutrality? How the D.C. Circuit Ruling May Affect You

What is "net neutrality"? A federal court's ruling on this high-tech issue could potentially change your Web-surfing experience.

For starters, net neutrality is the idea that all content on the Internet should be treated equally. Under that theory, no service provider would be allowed to give preferential treatment to a website or company in terms of connection speed, according to CNN.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday struck down anti-blocking and anti-discrimination sections of an FCC ruling that prevented Internet service providers from giving certain websites special treatment.

Hotfile Lawsuit Settled; MPAA to Get $80M Over Piracy Issues

The Motion Picture Association of America's massive copyright infringement lawsuit against Hotfile has been settled outside of court, with the MPAA winning big.

But what does the high-profile Hollywood settlement entail, and how will it affect the future of cyberlockers like Hotfile?

Human Genes Can't Be Patented, Supreme Court Rules

In a first of its kind ruling on human gene patents, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously decided that synthetically produced genetic material can be patented, but naturally occurring DNA extracted from the human body cannot, Reuters reports.

The Court's decision is a partial victory to biotechnology company Myriad Genetics Inc., which holds the patents in question.

But since the Court ruled that isolated human genes may not be patented, the rights group that challenged the patents came away with a win too.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Monsanto's patent rights were infringed by soybean farmer Vernon Bowman when he planted second-generation seeds that were meant for consumption.

The Court may have made its unanimous decision in the case in small part due to Bowman's somewhat ingenious way of selecting out Monsanto crops from bulk seed mixes and further developing those crops, reports The New York Times.

This ruling, issued Monday, may be the first of many in the battle over GMO foods. But this decision already has significant consequences for growers using genetically modified seeds.