By Phil Riske | Managing Editor, Rose Law Group Reporter
It was recently reported 3D printers can be used to produce plastic guns that work.
“I can see in 10-15 years where each family will own one [3d printer], and you can purchase a product and have it made right at your home . . . a bit Willy Wonka-esque, but perhaps an eventuality, said Robert Iussa, chair, Rose Law Group Intellectual Property Dept.
Whether 3D printing ends up to be an intellectual property (IP) case in a court remains to be seen, but a mega-IP issue made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of The Association for Molecular Pathology vs. Myriad Genetics, Inc., where the court heard arguments questioning the legitimacy of patents on human genes.
Also, companies that want to sue former workers who have stolen what they say are trade secrets need to prove that what was taken is truly a secret, the Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled.
“I work with [companies and indivdiuals] to perfect an ideal intellectual property strategy that can best accomplish their needs and goals and within their budgets.” Iussa said.
Rose Law Group Reporter: Most people probably are more familiar with terms such as patent, trademark and copyright than they are with intellectual property. So, how do you define intellectual property?
True, most people are more familiar with the individual terms. Intellectual property is the umbrella term that encompasses all of those things. It also includes lesser known areas, such as trade dress, trade secrets, technology transfer, licensing, etc.
The recent Supreme Court decision in favor of Monsanto’s claim regarding its genetically modified soybean seeds involved a patent, albeit expired, held by Monsanto. Explain a patent pending and the life of a granted patent.
A patent is pending from the day you file it until ultimate resolution, which can either mean ultimately abandoned at some point during the application process, or issued into a patent. If abandoned, any of the disclosed technology goes into the public domain.
A utility patent has a term of 20 years as measured from the day you file your patent application. It is not measured in any way from when it issues into a patent. It is important to also remember that a utility patent, which is the type of patent people think of when they think of patents, also has regular maintenance fees that must be paid at the four, eight, and 12 year mark, as measured from when the patent issues. If the maintenance fees are not paid, the patent will go abandoned, and the technology will go into the public domain.
There are two other types of patents: plant and design patents. A plant patent also has a term of 20 years as measured from when you file the application, but there are no maintenance fee requirements. A design patent, which merely covers the non-functioning aesthetic aspect of an item, only has a term of 14 years as measured from when the design patent issues, and here are also no maintenance fee requirements.
What’s the difference between a trademark and copyright?
Trademarks protect an entity’s name, logo, or tag-line for particular goods or services from confusion by the use of the same or similar name, logo, or tag-line. Trademarks are certainly an asset for the trademark owner, but trademarks really exist to protect the public. In fact, they are governed by the Lanham Act for unfair business practices, whereas patent and copyrights are provided for by the U.S. Constitution.
Copyrights protect creative works established upon a tangible medium; such as, audio-visual works, works of authorship, software, architecture, even boat hull designs, and mask works for integrated circuitry.
Trademarks can have an indefinite term; they just need to be renewed every 10 years. For example, the Coke trademark is going on 100 years. Copyrights have a limited term of, in general, 70 years plus the life of the author.
Let’s say in an informal conversation with a friend, someone comes up with a slogan or logo idea, and the friend actually sells it to a company that uses it. Would that be theft of intellectual property? In other words, can you copyright an idea?
That’s difficult to answer because there are number of different issues going on in that scenario. As best as I can answer that question, No you cannot.
Back to the Supreme Court, which has heard a case involving whether researchers can claim ownership of human genes they’ve discovered. Whatever the ruling, would it not certainly bring intellectual property law into a new age?
Yes and no. The basic principles of patent law will always apply, and I believe they can be applied here. The real questions in this realm are the philosophical ones.
Does not the case of the human genome illustrate how complex intellectual property can get?
Yes, but you would be surprised, historically, about how some of the most arguably irrelevant technology turned the patent world upside down. For example, the KSR Supreme Court case from a few years back significantly swung the pendulum regarding the standard by which the patent office determines patentability of subject matter, and that case merely dealt with an automotive foot pedal and linkage system.
The ability to download from the Internet music, movies and other intellectual property has created hundreds of lawsuits by the entertainment industry. Won’t enforcement of copyright law in Internet cases be almost impossible given the expense and time involved in finding and prosecuting the thieves?
Yes, but the statutory damages for copyright infringement are huge, and it actually has acted as a deterrent. There are hefty criminal consequences also. Moreover, there are relatively straightforward mechanisms to have an Internet provider block/remove infringing matter.
You are correct though, in that there can be a great amount of time and money involved to resolve. On a related topic, it is important to remember that it is the responsibility of the IP owner to police their own IP.
What problems might social media pose for security of IP?
I’m not too sure what you mean by “security of IP,” but the biggest problems we witness with social media by far, from an IP standpoint, are the significant infringement and misappropriation of copyrighted material. And I’m not talking about fair use of copyrighted material for commentary or parody, which is protected by free speech under the 1st Amendment. I’m talking about cutting images, videos, written material created by one person and pasting it somewhere else by another and passing it off as their own.
What’s the most complex or interesting case you’ve been involved in?
Unfortunately, my two most interesting cases I can’t discuss. One is really good and relates to the high profile adult entertainment industry. The other was settling a high-dollar trademark issue between a Fortune 500 corporation and a local mom and pop store. I “won” the case for the mom and pop store. Ironically, I resolved that dispute while working at a large law firm, which generally represents the large corporations, not mom and pop establishments.
Right now, the most interesting things I’m working on are for “green” technologies. For example, using natural bio-systems and methods to produce renewable fuels and cleaning products.
Would not the number of software companies in the Valley create lots of work for IP attorneys?
They do.
Without violating any confidentialities, what kind of cases are you working on now?
Mostly consumer products.
Read Robert Iussa’s biography here:
