NEWS
Patents on Transactions Using Cryptocurrency: Square versus PayPal
One of the challenges of patenting technology related to blockchain is that the subject matter is likely directed to one of the judicial exceptions (i.e., abstract ideas) that are not patent eligible.
Moreover, the subject matter likely falls within one of USPTO’s enumerated groupings of abstract ideas, i.e., “certain methods of organizing human activity” (e.g., commercial interactions).
To be patent eligible, the claims would need to include additional limitations that either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or add significantly more to the judicial exception. This article offers insight on future developments in the fintech industry and on patenting blockchain-related technology in the cryptocurrency space.
This brief references an article: Patents on Transactions Using Cryptocurrency: Square versus PayPal
Dr. Shuo Liu, Ph.D., Esq., is one of Fish IP Law’s attorneys.
Patent Prosecution Highway- Phase II
Brazil Approves Phase II of its PPH Program
The Brazilian IP Office (Instituto Nacional de Propriedade Industrial – INPI) approved phase II of its Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) program. The program commenced on January 1, 2021.
The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Program
The PPH program is a bilateral agreement between the patent offices of different countries (“member countries”). It allows for expedited examination of patent applications if a final ruling from a member country’s patent office has allowed at least one claim. That means a US patent applicant with allowed claims can file a corresponding patent application in Brazil under the PPH program to expedite examination in Brazil.
Phase II Expands Request Allowances
Phase II of Brazil’s PPH program expands the threshold number of PPH requests allowed per year. It also expands the number of PPH requests per application per week. Phase II no longer requires that the application be filed firstly with INPI. However, it also removes the ability to appeal a denied PPH request.
For More Information
For more information on expediting your US or foreign patent applications via the PPH program, contact FISH IP today.
New Way Of Enforcing Copyright Against Infringers
In late December, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act established the Copyright Claims Board (CCB).
In simple terms, the CCB is like a small claims court for copyright cases. It gives copyright owners an easier and more cost-efficient way of ensuring their rights, without necessarily using an attorney, and without other expenses of federal court litigation.
There are limitations. Damages cannot exceed $30,000, defendants can opt out of the process, and attorney’s fees can only be obtained under “extraordinary” circumstances, and with a ceiling of $5,000. There is an appeal process.
One feature of potentially great interest is that the CCB will have the right to bar claimants for up to 12 months, for repeatedly filing frivolous or harassing claims.
For more information on this topic, see our Copyright Infringement FAQ page.
New Trademark and TTAB Fee Schedule Effective January 2, 2021
Several trademark fees have increased starting January 2nd. The most notable fee increases are:
(1) TEAS standard filing fee is increased from $275 to $350,
(2) Combined §8 and §15 declarations from $325 to $425 per class, and
(3) Combined §8 declaration and §9 renewals from $425 to $525 per class.
The current USPTO trademark fee schedule can be found in the following link: https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/fees-and-payment/uspto-fee-schedule#Trademark%20Fees.
The Inventive Step in Chinese Patent Law
China is becoming an increasingly attractive patent filing destination for foreign companies. But foreign counsels are often confused by the country’s inventive step requirement. Chinese patent examiners often use abstract legal terms, such as “prominent substantive features” and “notable progress,” in their analysis.
This article, The Inventive Step in Chinese Patent Law Compared With the U.S. Non-Obviousness Standard, by Fish IP Law attorney Shuo Liu, Ph.D., Esq., provides an overview of the inventive step requirement in China, in comparison with the non-obviousness standard in the United States.
False Marking
What Is False Marking?
False marking (distinct from false marketing) occurs when a product is falsely labeled as covered by an enforceable patent.
Common Ways False Marking Occurs
False marking commonly occurs in three ways:
(1) there is no patent, only a patent application;
(2) the listed patent has expired or lapsed; or
(3) the product falls outside the patent claims.
Statutory Penalties for False Patent Marking
The statutory penalty for false marking is $500 per instance. In theory, a company selling 10,000 falsely marked units could face a $5,000,000 penalty.
Congressional Changes to the False Marking Statute
When the statute was first passed, law firms saw an opportunity and began filing lawsuits aggressively. Their conduct became so widespread that Congress quickly changed the law. Congress limited the penalty to “recovery of damages adequate to compensate for the injury.”
Proving Damages in False Marking Cases
In plain English, this means the plaintiff must prove actual damages. Proving damages for false marking is extremely difficult.
Example of a False Marking Scenario
For example, suppose a competitor falsely marks chairs with the number of an expired patent. Bob avoids selling similar chairs because he fears infringing that patent. However, proving damages would still be difficult.
Bob could easily check www.PublicPAIR and discover the patent was no longer in force.
The Copyright Office’s new GRTX option
New Group Copyright Registration for Short Online Works
Have you ever wanted to get federal copyright protection on a whole group of your best hot-take tweets? Well, now you can! The U.S. Copyright Office has created GRTX- a group registration option.
With GRTX, authors can register up to 50 ‘short online literary works’, ranging from 50 to 17,500 words per work. As some initial requirements, the works must have all been written by the same author(s), and only text-based works are eligible. In addition, the works must have been published first online and within a given three-month period.
Works That Are Not Eligible for GRTX Registration
Emails, podcasts, audiobooks and computer programs are not eligible, even if they meet the other criteria.
Who Should Use the GRTX Group Registration Option?
So who is this for? The Copyright office created this option in response to a petition by several writers associations. It is primarily meant to help bloggers and social media posters.
Filing Fees and Benefits of Early Copyright Registration
The low filing fee of $65 covers up to 50 works). Online authors who generate continuous new content should be incentivized to secure copyright coverage early and often.
You can check out the Copyright Office’s FAQ on the subject here and Circular 67 Group Registration of Short Online Literary Works.