Legal Environment of Business: Intellectual Property

"This article relates to intellectual property, which are the creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce. This article is the court case between Apple’s intellectual property and Samsung’s intellectual property."

Samsung v. Apple - the real issue here is the review on the rule whether someone violating a design patent should pay back any profits derived only from that component, or the total profits. Although The Federal Circuit ruled that the governing statue “explicitly authorizes the award of total profit from the article of manufacture bearing the patented design” (FC), they acknowledge that this made no sense in modern world, and therefore, this was a subject that had to be redirected to Congress. What the Supreme Court is going to be ruling for is whether damages relating to a design patent should or not be apportioned in relation to the value added by the patented design, or if it should be, instead, charged on the entire profits.

The article explores the U.S. legislative framework for preventing patent infringement in context to upcoming technology designs, as of October 2015.

A jury has ordered Apple to pay $302.4 million to VirnetX Holding Corp. for infringing on the company’s patents. However, the company has a reputation for being a “patent troll” making most of its revenue through licensing out its patents and suing other companies for infringing.

Stephen Kimble obtained a patent for a Spiderman toy that allowed you to shoot a “web” (foam string) from the palm of your hand. Kimble sought to negotiate a contract with Marvel Entertainment. Without making a deal, Marvel still marketed a “Web Blaster” similar to Kimble’s idea. After being sued by Kimble for patent infringement, the company agreed to purchase his patent for a lump sum and 3% running royalties. After the life of the patent ended, Marvel sought to stop paying the royalties.

Mattel claimed that MGA violated Mattel’s copyright on Barbie dolls when it began to produce Bratz dolls. MGA’s counterclaim was that Mattel misappropriated MGA’s trade secrets.

Rod Stewart is being sued over the rights to an image of his own head.

The article outlines the changes made to further protect trade secrets when President Obama signed the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016.

The company Trader Joe’s is fighting back after Canadian store owner, Mike Hallat, opened Pirate Joe’s which sells Trader Joe’s beloved products to the Canadian market.

The South Texas College of Law Houston had to recently change their name due to trademark issues pertaining to their name.