Remove agencies u-s-court-of-appeals-for-the-first-circuit
article thumbnail

Fair Use: Graham v. Prince and Warhol v. Goldsmith

LexBlog IP

District Court for the Southern District of New York denied Richard Prince’s request for summary judgment in two copyright infringement lawsuits brought against him, paving the way for a trial in Manhattan on the scope of fair use. [2] On May 11, the U.S. 2] A week later, the U.S. 2] A week later, the U.S. 3] Graham v.

article thumbnail

The Supreme Court Provides a Different Fix to Make APJs Inferior Officers

IP Tech Blog

Arthrex , the United States Supreme Court ruled that Patent Trial & Appeal Board (“PTAB”) Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) are unconstitutionally appointed because they effectively wield the power of principal officers while being appointed as inferior officers. On June 21, 2021, in United States v. 594 U.S. _ (2021).

Patent 87
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

A Court Calls Out Congress & the DOJ for Not Clarifying the ADA’s Application to Online Retailers–Martinez v. Cot’n Wash

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court rejects the claim because a “place of public accommodation” does not cover “retail websites without any connection to a physical space.” ” This is a published opinion, so it sets CA law until it’s superseded. .” Martinez claims that the website isn’t ADA compliant.

article thumbnail

En Banc on Indefiniteness

Patently-O

The extended delay here suggests to me that the court will still deny this petition, but the denial will be accompanied by explanatory opinions that further extend the doctrine. Split infinitives: Federal Circuit divides on Indefiniteness. by Dennis Crouch. The indefiniteness-focused en banc petition in Nature Simulation Sys.

Patent 55
article thumbnail

Government Jawboning Doesn’t Turn Internet Services into State Actors–Doe v. Google

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The plaintiffs sued for First Amendment violations (presumably a 1983 claim). The court previously denied a TRO. It’s not a close call. This argument is foreclosed by Prager U. The plaintiffs are “conservative content creators” (i.e., QAnon enthusiasts) who posted videos to YouTube. YouTube suspended their accounts.

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

[Eric’s note: this is the post you’ve been waiting for: Prof. Ochoa’s definitive analysis of the Supreme Courts Warhol opinion. For nearly 30 years, the framework for judging fair use cases has been remarkably stable, based on Justice Souter’s masterful opinion for a unanimous Court in Campbell v.