Writes Jack Bogdanich (Oct. 25): “‘Sam Adams’ is a very, very, very common name. People who brand their companies with a very, very, very common name have to live with the consequences. Letting supporters of a real politician named Sam Adams express their support for him with an appropriately named web domain or two is just something that Boston Beer is going to have to live with.” More: Lattman, Oct. 25.
Posts Tagged ‘tech through 2008’
Facebook and the law
What if any are the legal issues raised by employers’ use of Facebook and similar social networking sites to check out job applicants? (George Lenard, CollegeRecruiter.com blog, Sept. 1; via Between Lawyers). What about prosecutors who decide to use it to gather incriminating evidence? (Arbitrary and Capricious, Sept. 16, via Legal Blog Watch).
Speaking of Facebook, Overlawyered’s own recently launched group there is now up to 171 members, but that’s way short of the number that would cause Ted to empty his wallet for charity as promised, and there’s only 24 hours or so to go on his offer. Anyone for a last-minute surge?
AEI program on patent reform bill
The AEI Legal Center for the Public Interest’s patent law program tomorrow has a tremendous lineup. Jack Calfee and Claude Barfield will be discussing their new monograph, Biotechnology and the Patent System; the general counsels of Eli Lilly and of Cisco, among others, will be debating the pending patent reform bill. The event is open to the public and will be webcast, as well.
Update: “SCO Group files for bankruptcy protection”
“Three and a half years after launching a high-profile legal attack on Linux, The SCO Group has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. …the company’s legal case was dealt a crushing blow in August, when the federal judge overseeing its case, Dale Kimball, concluded “that Novell is the owner of the Unix and UnixWare copyrights.” Presumably the law firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner, which was pursuing SCO’s ambitious anti-Linux claims on contingency, has had to scale back its expectations of a payday (Stephen Shankland, CNet, Sept. 14). Earlier: Nov. 6, 2003, Nov. 13, 2004. More: Roger Parloff, Fortune “Legal Pad”.
“Need some cash? Sue Google!”
It seems everyone else is (Michael Myser, Wired News, Aug. 21).
From the comments: fine print
Reader Jim Finkel writes:
Re your post from the New Orleans paper on the fine print in contracts. As I have turned off my cookies (the usual paranoia), to read your article, you have to answer questions and assent for each of the following two pages of the three page article. So even reading the article about click-through, you have to click through and read the fine print. There has to be a point here.
That security patch your product needs? Sorry, we’ve patented it
Another new way to bring the idea of software patents into disrepute, per eWeek/SecurityWatch:
Security researchers, are you tired of handing your vulnerability discoveries over to your employer, as if that were what you’re paid to do? Helping vendors securing their products—for free—so that their users won’t be endangered by new vulnerabilities? Showing your hacking prowess off to your friends, groveling for security jobs or selling your raw discoveries to middlemen for a fraction—a pittance—of their real value?
Take heart, underappreciated, unremunerated vassals, for a new firm is offering to work with you on a vulnerability patch that they will then patent and go to court to defend. You’ll split the profits with the firm, Intellectual Weapons, if they manage to sell the patch to the vendor. The firm may also try to patent any adaptations to an intrusion detection system or any other third-party software aimed at dealing with the vulnerability, so rest assured, there are many parties from which to potentially squeeze payoff.
Intellectual Weapons is offering to accept vulnerabilities you’ve discovered, as long as you haven’t told anyone else, haven’t discovered the vulnerability through illegal means or have any legal responsibility to tell a vendor about the vulnerability.
Also, the vulnerability has to be profitable—the product must be “highly valuable,” according to the firm’s site, “especially as a percentage of the vendor’s revenue.” The product can’t be up for upcoming phaseout—after all, the system takes, on average, seven years to churn out a new patent. The vendor has to have deep pockets so it can pay damages, and your solution has to be simple enough to be explained to a jury. …
The firm says it “fully [anticipates] major battles.”
(“New Firm Eager to Slap Patents on Security Patches”, Jun. 7; Slashdot thread).
Scotts sues TerraCycle
According to litigation filed by giant gardening-supplies company Scotts Miracle-Gro, the 
package on the right infringes the “trade dress” of the package on the left. Comments reader/blogger Amy Alkon: “Terracycle’s package looks like Scotts’ like Betty White looks like Shaquille O’Neill.” TerraCycle has set up a website called SuedByScotts.com, and bad publicity for the larger firm has been ubiquitous. A sampling: Inc. magazine, Sustainable is Good, Consumerist, 10,000 Marshmallows.
“Spyware maker sues antispyware maker”
“An outfit accused of having a long history of making spyware has sued PC Tools, the maker of Spyware Doctor for preventing its product from working.” (Nick Farrell, The Inquirer, May 21). Reports InfoWorld:
According to a posting on a blog called Spamnotes.com, Zango is seeking at least $35 million in damages, alleging that Spyware Doctor removes Zango’s software without warning users that it will be deleted. The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in King County Superior Court in Seattle, according to Spamnotes.com.
Formerly known as 180solutions, Zango is trying to clean up its tarnished reputation. In November it paid $3 million to settle U.S. Federal Trade Commission charges that its software was being installed deceptively on PCs.
PC users have complained that the software has been installed without warning, forcing them to endure unwanted pop-up ads. The company has also been accused of tracking user behavior and making its software too difficult to remove.
(Robert McMillan, “Zango sues antispyware vendor PC Tools”, May 18; Slashdot thread; Grant Gross, “FTC settles with adware company”, InfoWorld, Nov. 3; Jeremy Kirk, “Reformed adware vendor still under fire”, Jul. 17; Slashdot thread, Jul. 10, 2006).
“Digg’s DVD-decoder fiasco”
John Dvorak says hyperactive lawyering should bear much of the blame (MarketWatch, May 3).