Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog » Intellectual Property

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center: Blackberry Wins 101 Disputed Domain Names

By Victoria VanBuren - June 18, 2009

Recently, a panel at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) granted Research in Motion 101 disputed domain names. In Research in Motion Limited v. Georges Elias, WIPO Case No. D2009-0218, the Complainant is Research in Motion, the owner of the registered marks for BLACKBERRY (U.S. and Canada) and BERRY (Hong Kong). Respondent is Georges Elias, who registered the disputed 111 domain names with GoDaddy.com. The panel applied the follow

U.S. Supreme Court: The End of Software Patents?

By Victoria VanBuren - June 1, 2009

ICANN: Recent Developments in Internet Governance

By Victoria VanBuren - May 28, 2009

As a future computer scientist, it is hard not to write about the most recent issue of Landslide, published by the ABA Section of Intellectual Property Law. The magazine contains an excellent article by Mark V. B. Partridge and Scott T. Lonardo. The authors discuss ICANN‘s recent developments in the Internet domain name system: Domain Name Tasting. In order to decrease the practice of domain name tasting, ICANN has adopted a new policy to l

Domain Name Disputes: SAP Loses Case Against UniSAP

By Victoria VanBuren - May 18, 2009

HP Requests Exception to ICANN Rule

By Victoria VanBuren - April 16, 2009

Hewlett-Packard requested the ICANN an exception to the rule that new domain names must consist of at least three characters. The company wants to register .HP and claims that the rule puts HP in a disadvantaged position against its competitors, like IBM. See: Hewlett-Packard Wants .HP Domain Name at the Domain Wire. Technorati Tags: law, HP, domain name

Microsoft Loses Patent Infringement Dispute

By Victoria VanBuren - April 13, 2009

Last week, a Rhode Island federal court ordered Microsoft Corp. to pay $388 million to Uniloc USA Inc. for willful infringement of software patents. Uniloc USA Inc., et al. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 03-440, (D. R.I. 2009). The verdict is said to be one of the largest patent infringement jury awards in U.S. history. Related Posts: Oh Microsoft, Microsoft , Moderation Please: Rhode Island Seemingly Applies Frye in Microsoft Patent Infringement Trial,

Bad Faith and Conflicts of Interest: Positive Software v. New Century

By Victoria VanBuren - March 13, 2009

We hope ya”ll survive four consecutive days of rain here in Austin. A story in today’s Texas Lawyer caught our attention. In the contested arbitration case Positive Software Solutions Inc. v. New Mortgage, et al., a U.S. District Judge issued sanctions against counsel for the defense, for acting in bad faith. The full text of the story is here.

U.S. District Court Denies Nokia’s Request to Compel Arbitration

By Victoria VanBuren - March 11, 2009

Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York refused to compel arbitration on the grounds that Nokia had waived its rights to arbitrate through its conduct in prior proceedings. The case, Nokia Corp. v. InterDigital, Inc. (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17376) relates to patent infringement and was heard by the Second Circuit on July 31, 2008 (2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 16328). Back then, the Second Circuit concluded that Nokia waive

Patent Dispute Resolution On-line Survey

By Victoria VanBuren - March 9, 2009

This post caught my attention, written by Gene Quinn from the IP Watchdog. I visited the survey and it takes only 3 minutes to complete the multiple choice questionnaire. Needless to say, this study could be an excellent avenue to promote arbitration and mediation to aid the resolution of patent-related disputes. The Alternative Patent Dispute Resolution Project (”APDRP”) at Thomas Jefferson School of Law (”TJSL”) in San Diego, California is cond

Fifth Circuit: Arbitrator Should Determine Arbitrability

By Victoria VanBuren - March 5, 2009

In Agere Systems Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., (No. 07-40984), the Fifth Circuit held that the question of arbitrability should be decided by an arbitrator. The dispute between Agere Systems and Samsung Electronics arouse out of five patent cross-licensing agreements (dated 1990, 1995, 1999, 2000, and 2006). In 2006, Agere sued Samsung for breach of the licensing agreement and Samsung responded by invoking a mediation clause contained in