Blog – Adam Garson Law

Designs for patents

The Internet-enabled business method patent just clutched its chest and fell over dead.The cause of its demise is theUltramercial v Hulu (Fed. Cir. 2014) case in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  The Ultramercial patents address a typical Internet-enabled business method.  Under the patents, a consumer agrees to view an advertisement and then […]

Designs for patents

In the not-so-slow death spiral of software patents in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Alice v CLS Bank, another trial court has determined that a patent for software should not have been issued because the software addressed by the patent is not the kind of invention eligible for patenting.  In the case of […]

Copyright

Now that sporting a tattoo has gone mainstream, it would only stand to reason – – given that tattoos are creative expressions fixed in a tangible medium (skin) – – that tattoo artists seek protection of their designs under copyright law. To date, few copyright cases involving tattoos have been filed but we’ve learned that […]

Question on a Keyboard

 Dear Doc: I read recently that music stars Robin Thicke, Pharrell “Hat” Williams and Clifford “TI” Harris Jr. have sued the late Marvin Gaye’s kids. Thicke and his buddies, according to the news, claim that they did not steal parts of Gaye’s song “Got to Give it Up” in the hit from a year ago […]

Internet Domains

Lipton, Weinberger & Husick (“LWH”) recently scored another success against domainer, Marchex, Inc.  Here’s some background. Domainers – those who speculate in domain names – set up web sites for purposes of selling a domain or obtaining pay-per-click revenues. When the domain is identical or similar to another company’s trademark, trademark owners will attempt to […]

As discussed above, the Alice v CLS Bank decision of the United States Supreme Court has the potential to preclude patent protection for many software and computer-implemented inventions and to invalidate many issued patents for those inventions.  The Court gave only the sketchiest guidance on how to determine when a claimed invention is too abstract. […]