News & Analysis as of

Google Intellectual Property Protection

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Third Time’s the Charm: Judge Hellerstein Denies Summary Judgment on Previously Dismissed Patent Claims Against Google

On August 22, 2024, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) denied Google LLC’s motion for summary judgment that (1) it has not infringed two asserted patents; and (2) the two patents are invalid for lack of written...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Google Facing New Copyright Suit Over AI-Powered Image Generator

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Visual artists sued Google last week, alleging that Google’s AI-powered image generator, Imagen, was trained on their copyrighted content without authorization. The proposed class action asserts claims of direct copyright...more

International Lawyers Network

Usage of Ad Words by a Competitor Does Not Amount to Trademark Infringement

Google AdWords have long been used by businesses to ensure that their business listings feature on top of the Google search results when the users search for particular terms (which have been bought by a business from...more

Kilpatrick

4 Key Takeaways - Prosecution Laches: A Potential Threat to Continuation Application Practice

Kilpatrick on

Kilpatrick’s Darin Gibby and David Hsu presented a session during the firm’s annual “SKI-LE” in Vail, Colorado, exploring prosecution laches and continuation application strategies in light of the recent decision in Sonos v....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | February 2024

Knobbe Martens on

The Outcome of the PTAB’s Analysis May Determine Whether the PTAB Engaged in Claim Construction - In Google LLC v. Ecofactor, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1750, the Federal Circuit held that the outcome of the PTAB’s analysis of...more

Kilpatrick

PTAB Alert: Implicit Claim Construction and the Standard of Review

Kilpatrick on

Today, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision vacating and remanding a PTAB decision based on an erroneous implicit claim construction. Google v. EcoFactor, Case Nos. 2022-1750, 2022-1767 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2024)....more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

“AI-Related” Chip Patents - 1.6 Billion Reasons Why Google May Have Agreed to Settle

Recent headlines have focused on the $1.6 billion damages claim and Google’s possible exposure in Singular Computing’s patent infringement lawsuit involving Google’s “AI-related” chips. $1.6 billion is certainly not chump...more

Sunstein LLP

The New York Times v. OpenAI: The Biggest IP Case Ever

Sunstein LLP on

On December 27, 2023, the New York Times filed a complaint in the Southern District of New York against Microsoft and OpenAI, alleging massive copyright infringement. This promises to be the most high-stakes intellectual...more

Holland & Knight LLP

The Coming Shift from Patent to Trade Secret Protection for Generative AI Inventions

Holland & Knight LLP on

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the remarkable ability to develop novel solutions to problems, and patent law has historically protected those solutions. Under current statutes and jurisprudence, however, only...more

Troutman Pepper

EDVA Judge Rules That Geolocation Patents Are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

Troutman Pepper on

On September 18, in identical opinions issued in separate cases against Google and Apple, EDVA District Judge Michael Nachmanoff ruled that four patents directed toward geolocation of mobile devices claimed patent-ineligible...more

Knobbe Martens

PTAB Need Not Consider Mountain of Evidence Submitted Without a Map

Knobbe Martens on

PARUS HOLDINGS, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Reyna.  Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary:  PTAB did not err in declining to consider...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Deep Dive into Generative AI and What Will Drive Tomorrow

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Since our last post looking at artificial intelligence and generative AI, we have seen an explosion of activity that can only be referred to as a “hype-cycle.” There is a growing consumer and enterprise appetite for this...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., 34 F.4th 1081...

Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more

Venable LLP

Generative AI - Copyright Overview Part 1

Venable LLP on

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is a technology promising to disrupt how artwork is created, software is developed, and text is written. This disruption brings with it a host of new legal questions surrounding...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Stark & Stark

Road to Safe Harbor: Implementation of Repeat Infringer Policy Necessary for DMCA Safe Harbor Protection from Copyright...

Stark & Stark on

In the cloud-based age where numerous tech giants such as Google, Amazon, and Apple have launched cloud music services, many kept abreast of ongoing legal battles over online service providers’ liability for users’ music...more

Knobbe Martens

Raise It or Lose It! The Federal Circuit Will Not Address Obviousness Arguments First Raised by the PTO on Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

In Re Google LLC - Before: Moore, Lourie, and Prost. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTO’s arguments on appeal did not reflect the record below....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2022

Knobbe Martens on

Somebody’s Wrong:  PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR - In Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., Appeal No. 21-1179, the Federal Circuit held that, for purposes of determining whether a reference was...more

Knobbe Martens

Somebody’s Wrong: PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR

Knobbe Martens on

GOOGLE LLC v. IPA TECHNOLOGIES INC. Before Dyk, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation...more

Jones Day

Fintiv Revisited—District Court Transfer Results in Institution Reversal

Jones Day on

In November 2020, Google LLC filed two petitions requesting an inter partes review of the claims of Ikorongo Technology LLC (“Ikorongo”) owned U.S. Patent No. 8,874,554 (“the ’554 patent”)....more

Kidon IP

Response to the US Department of Justice call for Public Comments on SEPs Part 1 of 6

Kidon IP on

Executive Summary - The 2013 statement was a favor to Apple and Google and was widely misinterpreted and misused (often intentionally by opportunistic infringers found by courts and/or the ITC to be “unwilling).  It was...more

Knobbe Martens

A Preamble That Saves May Be a Preamble That Limits

Knobbe Martens on

DATA ENGINE TECHNOLOGIES LLC v. GOOGLE LLC. Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee that relies on language in the preamble to...more

Foster Garvey PC

Sports & Entertainment Spotlight - May 2021 #3

Foster Garvey PC on

As readers from last week will recall, we spent some time examining the notion of credibility. One week later, we’re witnessing what credibility (or lack thereof) hath wrought on our subjects. Bob Baffert? Banned from New...more

Troutman Pepper

Supreme Court Leaves as Many Questions as It Answers in 'Google v. Oracle'

Troutman Pepper on

The Court cleared Google of copyright infringement in terminating a 16-year long dispute as to whether Google’s Android mobile platform had infringed Oracle’s Java programming language’s copyright. However, the Court did not...more

Sunstein LLP

Google v. Oracle: Supreme Court Holds Copying of Key Part of Java Software, its API, is Fair Use

Sunstein LLP on

Ending a struggle between two tech titans stretching over more than a decade, the Supreme Court held in a 6-2 opinion that Google’s copying of key portions of the Application Programming Interface (API) of Oracle’s Java SE...more

71 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide