We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 22

Jury picked and trial commences in SCO v. Novell UNIX code copyright ownership dispute

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 10 2010

The back story to the dispute between The SCO Group and Novell, Inc., over the ownership of copyrights to UNIX source code is lengthy indeed

Landmark open source lawsuit ends with settlement

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 24 2010

A dispute between a proprietary software company and the Java Model Railroad Interface (JMRI) open source project has ended with a settlement, the JRMI project announced on February 17

Novell prevails in jury trial on ownership of UNIX copyrights

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 30 2010

The jury in The SCO Group v. Novell, Inc. litigation over ownership of the copyrights in UNIX source code has ruled in favor of Novell, the company announced on its blog this afternoon

In assessing employee status in copyright ownership disputes, technology start-ups are a special case, says the Ninth Circuit

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 8 2010

A technology start-up company can be an informal environment - both Apple Computer and Hewlett-Packard famously started out in garages, and Yahoo!, Google and Facebook were developed, initially at least, in college dorm rooms

Computer file extension functional, therefore not protectable as trademark

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

A computer file extension is inherently functional, therefore a software company that utilizes a particular file extension to designate files that are accessed by its proprietary software may not protect the letters comprising the file extension as a trademark, a district court ruled

Floor plans in online database not protectable under copyright law

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

Copying of floor plans that were collected from third parties and compiled into an online database is not actionable under copyright law, a district court ruled

Operator of BitTorrent P2P file-sharing network induced copyright infringement and is ineligible for DMCA safe harbors

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

The operator of a file-sharing network that utilized the BitTorrent file-sharing technology is secondarily liable for inducing copyright infringement by users of the network, a district court ruled

No bad faith in filing takedown notice where resolution of intellectual property rights underlying DMCA claim involved complex and novel legal issues

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

A party who filed a takedown notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act seeking removal of a Web site in which he claimed copyright ownership did not act in bad faith where the resolution of the intellectual property rights underlying his claim involved complex and novel issues, a district court ruled

California single publication rule applies to web site right of publicity, Lanham Act claims

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

The California single publication rule bars an individual's common law and California statutory right of publicity and Lanham Act false endorsement claims for the sale of merchandise on a Web site, a district court ruled

Domain name registrar not immune from trademark owner's infringement, ACPA claims

  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 14 2010

A domain name registrar that registered numerous infringing domain names, provided private registration services in conjunction with a related entity that concealed the identity of the registrants, and received fees when ads on sites connected to the infringing domain names were clicked, may be liable under the Lanham Act and the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, a district court ruled