Tavory claimed that NTP wasn't the prevailing party because the copyright claim was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Wrong; $37,000 in attorneys' fees on the copyright portion of the suit affirmed.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Bad News Two Days In a Row
Adding insult to injury after yesterday's post, in which the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision that Oren Tavory wasn't a co-owner of the NTP patents, in a separate decision the Federal Circuit affirmed that he also owed NTP the attorneys' fees it incurred defending against his copyright suit. Mr. Tavory claimed infringement of source code used in the patent application, but his copyright application was defective because the deposit copy wasn't a bona fide copy of the original software.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2011
(85)
-
►
December
(10)
- Walter Mercado Still Losing
- Just Another Skirmish or the War?
- Giving An Idea to Your Employer
- Beneficial Owners Don't Have Standing
- Zombie Department Stores Rise (as ugly t-shirts)
- Must All Trademark Owners be Joined?
- Who Owns the Mark Used by a Bunch of People?
- Bratz Copied, But Didn't Infringe
- When You Can Change the Name of the Registrant
- It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time
-
►
June
(13)
- How to Steal a Trademark
- Sibling Rivalry
- Privity as a Sword
- The Coup de Grâce for Pooh?
- When Are You a "Distributor"?
- Righthaven's Failed Assignment Agreement
- Important New Patent Ownership Decision!
- Abandoned, No Surprise
- Surprise - Wittmann Can't Call His Product "Wittma...
- There Has to Be Confusion
- Moral Rights versus Economic Rights
- Rejected Trademark License
- Think of the Trademark Too
-
►
December
(10)
0 comments:
Post a Comment