<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
> <channel><title>InhouseBlog.com &#187; Intellectual Property</title> <atom:link href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/tag/intellectual_property/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com</link> <description>In-House Counsel News and Jobs Since 2005</description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:03:24 +0000</lastBuildDate> <language>en</language> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" /> <item><title>Open Source Software &#8211; Risks, Use and Compliance (Free CLE Event from PLC, Feb. 22, 2012)</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/open_source_software_free_cle_event/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/open_source_software_free_cle_event/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:23:27 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Events]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Cyberlaw]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=23418</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Open Source Software (&#8220;OSS&#8221;) is currently pervasive in its use for companies both large and small. Businesses use OSS to develop software rapidly and effectively, whether for their internal systems or for customer-facing products. Although OSS is obtained at no charge, there are significant risks in its usage because if the OSS is not integrated [...]</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Open Source Software (&#8220;OSS&#8221;) is currently pervasive in its use for companies both large and small. Businesses use OSS to develop software rapidly and effectively, whether for their internal systems or for customer-facing products. Although OSS is obtained at no charge, there are significant risks in its usage because if the OSS is not integrated properly into existing systems, it can &#8220;infect&#8221; proprietary software, and a company is at risk of losing significant ownership value. <span
id="more-23418"></span>This program will address the following:</p><p>How is OSS licensed?</p><p>Risks in use of OSS.</p><p>Procedures to use when introducing OSS into a company&#8217;s systems.</p><p>How to develop an OSS Compliance Policy.</p><p>Documenting OSS usage.</p><p>OSS due diligence and representations in mergers, acquisitions and transfers of software assets.</p><p>Attendees of the live webinar may receive CLE credit for the following states: CA, IL and NY.*</p><p>Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2012</p><p>Time: 1:00pm- 2:00pm ET (10:00am &#8211; 11:00am PT)</p><p>Cost: Free</p><p>Speakers:<br
/> Christopher Palestro<br
/> Director and Managing Counsel of IP Transactions<br
/> Hewlett-Packard</p><p>Richard Raysman<br
/> Holland &#038; Knight LLP</p><p>Jeffrey R. Seul<br
/> Holland &#038; Knight LLP</p><p>Paul Connuck (Moderator)<br
/> IP &#038; IT Editor<br
/> Practical Law Company</p><p>*CLE credit for this program will be sought by Holland &#038; Knight, which is an approved CLE provider in Illinois, New York and California. For New York attorneys, the webinar format will not qualify for CLE credit for transitional (newly admitted) attorneys. CLE credit will be available for experienced New York attorneys.</p><p>To register, <a
href="https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=registration.jsp&#038;eventid=395925&#038;sessionid=1&#038;key=361F4495F187733C47C5A4819D27109E&#038;partnerref=inhouseblog&#038;sourcepage=register" title="Open Source Software - Free CLE Event" target="_blank">visit the registration page today</a>.</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/open_source_software_free_cle_event/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Rounding Up the 10 Biggest IP Litigation Wins of 2011</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip_litigation/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip_litigation/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:42:36 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=22706</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In light of the ever-increasing importance of intellectual property to not just Apple, but seemingly every modern business, CorpCounsel presents a list of last year's top 10 IP litigation wins.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In light of the ever-increasing importance of intellectual property to not just Apple, but seemingly every modern business, CorpCounsel presents a list of last year&#8217;s top 10 IP litigation wins.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1327266379874&amp;rss=cc" title="Rounding Up the 10 Biggest IP Litigation Wins of 2011">Rounding Up the 10 Biggest IP Litigation Wins of 2011</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip_litigation/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>10 Things You Should Know as the America Invents Act Goes Into Effect</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act-2/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act-2/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:51:03 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Guides]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=22560</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Reporter Sheri Qualters of CorpCounsel asked several patent practitioners to come up with a list of things lawyers should know about the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. [via: 10 Things You Should Know as the New Patent Law Goes Into Effect at CorpCounsel] Like this post? Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any [...]</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Reporter Sheri Qualters of <em>CorpCounsel</em> asked several patent practitioners to come up with a list of things lawyers should know about the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1327242630299&amp;rss=cc" title="10 Things You Should Know as the New Patent Law Goes Into Effect">10 Things You Should Know as the New Patent Law Goes Into Effect</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Megaupload.com accused of massive copyright infringement</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/megaupload/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/megaupload/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:00:53 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Cyberlaw]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=22419</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>With the flavor of the week being SOPA, PIPA and IP issues, it should come as little surprise that the Department of Justice is cracking down on a major content hosting website.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>With the flavor of the week being SOPA, PIPA and IP issues, it should come as little surprise that the Department of Justice is cracking down on a major content hosting website &#8211; MegaUpload.com.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/y5uyGGnup5w/megauploadcom-accused-of-massive-copyright-infring" title="Megaupload.com accused of massive copyright infringement">Megaupload.com accused of massive copyright infringement</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/megaupload/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Chipsters, a group for women lawyers who are IP chief counsel</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/chipsters/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/chipsters/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:05:17 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Careers]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Diversity]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=22203</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In 2005, a group of in-house counsel coalesced, all women, all the top intellectual property lawyers in their respective companies. They cleverly called themselves Chipsters – CHiefIP lawyers – and they have continued to meet. The lawyers worked or still...</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Female IP Chief Counsel unite &#8211; in a group called Chipsters:</p><blockquote><p>In 2005, a group of in-house counsel coalesced, all women, all the top intellectual property lawyers in their respective companies. They cleverly called themselves Chipsters – ChiefIP lawyers – and they have continued to meet.</p></blockquote><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/TfzN/~3/GQ6SWXCmVlc/chipsters-a-group-for-women-lawyers-who-are-ip-chief-counsel.html" title="Chipsters, a group for women lawyers who are IP chief counsel">Chipsters, a group for women lawyers who are IP chief counsel</a> at the Law Department Management Blog]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/chipsters/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Trademarking Colors a Tricky Business, But It Can Be Done</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademarking_colors/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademarking_colors/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:44:55 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=19813</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Since we do not live in a black-and-white world, color has always been a part of branding and advertising. And for some products and services, color is the primary focus of branding efforts.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Since we do not live in a black-and-white world, color has always been a part of branding and advertising. Trademarking colors is a tricky business, but it can be done.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1322424285345&amp;rss=cc" title="Intellectual Property: Trademarking Colors a Tricky Business, But It Can Be Done">Intellectual Property: Trademarking Colors a Tricky Business, But It Can Be Done</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademarking_colors/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>The 2011 Patent Litigation Survey</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation_survey/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation_survey/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:15:22 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=19596</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Judges and lawmakers are working to deter patent suits, but you wouldn't know it from the results of the 2011 edition of our annual Patent Litigation Survey.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Judges and lawmakers are working to deter patent suits, but you wouldn&#8217;t know it from the results of the 2011 edition of CorpCounsel&#8217;s annual Patent Litigation Survey.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1322399109049&amp;rss=cc" title="The 2011 Patent Litigation Survey">The 2011 Patent Litigation Survey</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation_survey/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>IP: 3 strategies for beating patent trolls</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beating_patent_trolls/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beating_patent_trolls/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:24:04 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=19373</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>These tips can help companies efficiently manage their defense.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Tips courtesy of InsideCounsel intended to help companies efficiently manage their defense against pernicious patent trolls.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/apsSKd2JzIM/ip-3-strategies-for-beating-patent-trolls" title="IP: 3 strategies for beating patent trolls">IP: 3 strategies for beating patent trolls</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beating_patent_trolls/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Busy Times Ahead for Apple and Samsung Inhouse Patent Counsel</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/busy_inhouse_patent_counsel/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/busy_inhouse_patent_counsel/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:30:58 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18922</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>With a month and a half left to go in 2011, it looks like Samsung Electronics Co. has already made big plans for 2012: kicking its patent-infringement litigation efforts against Apple into high gear.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The end of the year and 2012 will be quite busy for Samsung and Apple inhouse patent counsel:</p><blockquote><p>With a month and a half left to go in 2011, it looks like Samsung Electronics Co. has already made big plans for 2012: kicking its patent-infringement litigation efforts against Apple into high gear.</p></blockquote><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202532504418&amp;rss=cc" title="Samsung Makes Apple Patent-Litigation Plans for 2012">Samsung Makes Apple Patent-Litigation Plans for 2012</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/busy_inhouse_patent_counsel/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>An Overview of the America Invents Act</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:32:13 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Guest Contributor</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Guides]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18907</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>This Note, contributed to InhouseBlog by Practical Law Company, summarizes the key features of the Patent Reform Act of 2011, known as the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). It provides an overview of the AIA&#8217;s reforms to US patent law, including changing the patent system from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system, the scope of [...]</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>This <a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act.pdf" title="An Overview of the America Invents Act" target="_blank">Note</a>, contributed to InhouseBlog by <a
href="http://us.practicallaw.com/about/plc-law-department-trial-signup?utm_campaign=USLD16171" title="Practical Law Company" target="_blank">Practical Law Company</a>, summarizes the key features of the Patent Reform Act of 2011, known as the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). It provides an overview of the AIA&#8217;s reforms to US patent law, including changing the patent system from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system, the scope of prior art used to determine novelty and the procedures for challenging the validity of issued patents. The <a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act.pdf" title="An Overview of the America Invents Act" target="_blank">Note</a> also provides an overview of provisions that expand the prior use defense to patent infringement, eliminate the best mode defense and the need to obtain an opinion of counsel to defend against a willful infringement claim, allow for virtual patent marking and change false patent marking law, create a new supplemental examination procedure to limit potential inequitable conduct claims and change US Patent and Trademark Office and patent litigation procedures. Download <a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act.pdf" title="An Overview of the America Invents Act" target="_blank">An Overview of the America Invents Act</a> today (PDF file).</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/america_invents_act/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>IP: Using a competitor&#8217;s trademark in marketing</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/competitors_trademark/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/competitors_trademark/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:44:30 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Guides]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18540</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Finding the line between fair use and infringement</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Finding the line between fair use and infringement.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/_k-rvB5g_NE/ip-using-a-competitors-trademark-in-marketing" title="IP: Using a competitor's trademark in marketing">IP: Using a competitor's trademark in marketing</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/competitors_trademark/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Google&#8217;s Patent Counsel on the Ongoing Tech-Patent Wars</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_wars/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_wars/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 09:51:40 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18495</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In a recent interview, Google patent counsel Tim Porter discusses the ongoing patent spats over its Android smartphone operating system, which has led to sparring between the web-search giant and such industry heavyweights as Apple and Microsoft.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In a recent interview, Google patent counsel Tim Porter discusses the ongoing patent wars over its Android smartphone operating system, which has led to sparring between the web-search giant and such industry heavyweights as Apple and Microsoft.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202528341178&amp;rss=cc" title="Google's Patent Counsel on the Ongoing Tech-Patent Wars">Google's Patent Counsel on the Ongoing Tech-Patent Wars</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_wars/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>EMC&#8217;s D.I.Y. Approach to IP and Tech Licensing</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/technology_licensing/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/technology_licensing/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 14:11:46 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Guides]]></category> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18098</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>When it comes to the rough-and-tumble world of tech patents, EMC's IP lawyers would rather do the work themselves.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>When it comes to the rough-and-tumble world of tech patents, EMC&#8217;s IP lawyers would rather do the technology licensing work themselves.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1319438618349&amp;rss=cc" title="The D.I.Y. Approach to Intellectual Property and Tech Licensing">The D.I.Y. Approach to Intellectual Property and Tech Licensing</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/technology_licensing/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Copyright Troll Righthaven Faces Possible Asset Seizure</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/righthaven/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/righthaven/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:46:34 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=18163</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Wayne Hoehn, one of the defendants that Righthaven has unsuccessfully sued for copyright infringement, has asked a Las Vegas federal district court judge to allow him to seize Righthaven's assets in order to enforce a judgment he won in August.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Well, things may not be going the way Righthaven expected:</p><blockquote><p>Wayne Hoehn, one of the defendants that Righthaven has unsuccessfully sued for copyright infringement, has asked a Las Vegas federal district court judge to allow him to seize Righthaven&#8217;s assets in order to enforce a judgment he won in August.</p></blockquote><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202521061559&amp;rss=cc" title="Copyright Troll Righthaven Faces Possible Asset Seizure">Copyright Troll Righthaven Faces Possible Asset Seizure</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/righthaven/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Trade secret theft outside U.S. is basis for barring imports, Federal Circuit rules</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/barring_imports/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/barring_imports/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:52:04 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Law.com</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Corporate/M&A]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=16540</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In a split ruling, the Federal Circuit has upheld an International Trade Commission order that barred a company in China from importing railway wheels into the United States because the company misappropriated trade secrets in China from a U.S. company.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In a split ruling, the Federal Circuit has upheld an International Trade Commission order barring imports of railway wheels by a Chinese company into the US because the company misappropriated trade secrets in China from a US company.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sign_me_in.jsp?article=http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202518718897&amp;rss=newswire" title="Trade secret theft outside U.S. is basis for barring imports, Federal Circuit rules">Trade secret theft outside U.S. is basis for barring imports, Federal Circuit rules</a> at Law.com]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/barring_imports/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>IP: Winning patent litigation on a budget</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:39:53 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=15496</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Your counsel’s efficiency is key to making patent litigation a successful part of your business strategy.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Your counsel’s efficiency is key to making patent litigation a successful part of your business strategy.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/hzTaG3V-Iws/ip-winning-patent-litigation-on-a-budget" title="IP: Winning patent litigation on a budget">IP: Winning patent litigation on a budget</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/patent_litigation/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>In House Patent Counsel Job Openings are Booming</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/in_house_patent_counsel_jobs/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/in_house_patent_counsel_jobs/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:27:55 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Careers]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Inhouse Counsel Jobs]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=15053</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In house patent counsel job openings are booming. With the increasing importance of intellectual property as an offensive and defensive weapon, and the advent of patent trolls, it&#8217;s no surprise that law departments are looking to add in house patent counsel to their teams. Head over to GoInhouse.com to check out a slew of in [...]</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In house patent counsel job openings are booming.  With the increasing importance of intellectual property as an offensive and defensive weapon, and the advent of patent trolls, it&#8217;s no surprise that law departments are looking to add in house patent counsel to their teams.  Head over to GoInhouse.com to check out <a
href="http://goo.gl/QCOA9" title="In House Patent Counsel Jobs" target="_blank">a slew of in house patent counsel and intellectual property jobs</a>.</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/in_house_patent_counsel_jobs/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>ECJ&#8217;s trademark infringement ruling affects online operators</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ecj_trademark_ruling/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ecj_trademark_ruling/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 10:04:42 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Cyberlaw]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=14637</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Court considers liabilities in keyword advertising in L'Oreal v. eBay.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Court considers liabilities in keyword advertising in L&#8217;Oreal v. eBay.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/DcBVheqdagk/ecjs-trademark-infringement-ruling-affects-online" title="ECJ's trademark infringement ruling affects online operators">ECJ's trademark infringement ruling affects online operators</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ecj_trademark_ruling/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>The America Invents Act and its Effects on US Patent Law</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/the_america_invents_act/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/the_america_invents_act/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:21:57 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=10658</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>After years of criticism regarding the state of U.S. patent law, the Senate passed the America Invents Act, which is being called the most sweeping patent reform in half a century. But many IP experts are taking a wait-and-see approach.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>After years of criticism regarding the state of U.S. patent law, the Senate passed the America Invents Act, which is being called the most sweeping patent reform in half a century. But many IP experts are taking a wait-and-see approach.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202514170593&amp;rss=cc" title="What Effects Will the America Invents Act Have on U.S. Patent Law?">What Effects Will the America Invents Act Have on U.S. Patent Law?</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/the_america_invents_act/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>1</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Congress Set To Move On Patents</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/congress-set-move-patents/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/congress-set-move-patents/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:00:19 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=8807</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p> Advocates of legislation to overhaul the nation’s sluggish patent system could finally see a bill on President Obama’s desk, as Congress is set to move as soon as this week on bipartisan legislation to update the U.S.’s patent laws. The Senate was set to vote late Tuesday on cutting off debate about legislation to overhaul the nationâ€™s sluggish patent system, a prospect cheered by many large companies but criticized by smaller businesses. If the vote succeeds, final passage could come on Thursday. Under the bill, the U.S. would shift to awarding patents on a â€œfirst to fileâ€� system instead of the current â€œfirst to inventâ€� basis</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p> Advocates of legislation to overhaul the nation’s sluggish patent system could finally see a bill on President Obama’s desk, as Congress is set to move as soon as this week on bipartisan legislation to update the U.S.’s patent laws.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/09/06/congress-set-to-move-on-patents/?mod=WSJBlog" title="Congress Set To Move On Patents">Congress Set To Move On Patents</a> at the WSJ Law Blog]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/congress-set-move-patents/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>“The nastiest copyright notice ever written”</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/nastiest-copyright-notice-written/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/nastiest-copyright-notice-written/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 21:27:23 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=8798</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>It really is a piece of work. Head over when you have time to give it a read &#8211; make sure you are sitting down. [via “The nastiest copyright notice ever written”.] Like this post? Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>It really is a piece of work.  Head over when you have time to give it a read &#8211; make sure you are sitting down.</p><p>[via <a
href='http://overlawyered.com/2011/09/the-nastiest-copyright-notice-ever-written/'>“The nastiest copyright notice ever written”</a>.]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/nastiest-copyright-notice-written/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Ruling Leaves Silicon Valley Lawyers Wondering Whether &#8216;Practicality&#8217; Means &#8216;Patentable&#8217;</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ruling_leaves_silicon_valley_lawyers_wondering_whether_practicality_means_patentable/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ruling_leaves_silicon_valley_lawyers_wondering_whether_practicality_means_patentable/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:25:44 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=7836</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions leaves room for debate about what kinds of business methods can be patented, thanks to one word: practicality.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions leaves room for debate about what kinds of business methods can be patented, thanks to one word: practicality.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202512708124&amp;rss=cc" title="Ruling Leaves Silicon Valley Lawyers Wondering Whether 'Practicality' Means 'Patentable'">Ruling Leaves Silicon Valley Lawyers Wondering Whether 'Practicality' Means 'Patentable'</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ruling_leaves_silicon_valley_lawyers_wondering_whether_practicality_means_patentable/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>1</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Trademark Holders Face an Explicit Problem With .XXX Web Domain</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademark-holders-face-explicit-problem-xxx-web-domain/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademark-holders-face-explicit-problem-xxx-web-domain/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:25:43 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=7268</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>As ICANN's expansion of top-level internet domains goes into effect, the keepers of corporate trademarks are going to need to have an unusual conversation in the next few weeks: "What should we do about the .xxx domain?"</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>As ICANN&#8217;s expansion of top-level internet domains goes into effect, the keepers of corporate trademarks are going to need to have an unusual conversation in the next few weeks: &#8220;What should we do about the .xxx domain?&#8221;</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202512288484&amp;rss=cc" title="Trademark Holders Face an Explicit Problem With .XXX Web Domain">Trademark Holders Face an Explicit Problem With .XXX Web Domain</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/trademark-holders-face-explicit-problem-xxx-web-domain/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>In notable post-&#8217;Bilski&#8217; ruling, Federal Circuit finds software patent invalid</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/notable-postbilski-ruling-federal-circuit-finds-software-patent-invalid/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/notable-postbilski-ruling-federal-circuit-finds-software-patent-invalid/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 10:04:01 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Law.com</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=6442</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>In a closely watched case about business method patentability following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Bilski v. Kappos, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found broad software patent claims invalid because they attempt to capture "unpatentable mental processes."</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>In a closely watched case about business method patentability following the U.S. Supreme Court&#8217;s 2010 decision in Bilski v. Kappos, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found broad software patent claims invalid because they attempt to capture &#8220;unpatentable mental processes.&#8221;</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202511562816&amp;rss=nlj" title="In notable post-'Bilski' ruling, Federal Circuit finds software patent invalid">In notable post-'Bilski' ruling, Federal Circuit finds software patent invalid</a> at Law.com]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/notable-postbilski-ruling-federal-circuit-finds-software-patent-invalid/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>&#8216;Original Patent Troll&#8217; is Back After Long Hiatus, With a New Name and New Patents</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/original-patent-troll-long-hiatus-patents/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/original-patent-troll-long-hiatus-patents/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 08:02:34 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[IT/Software/Internet]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=6423</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Anthony Brown, CEO of a new non-practicing entity called Cascades Ventures, is the man who inspired former Intel in-house lawyer Peter Detkin to coin the term "patent troll" a decade ago, referring to Brown, his company TechSearch, and their lawyer, Raymond Niro.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Anthony Brown, CEO of a new non-practicing entity called Cascades Ventures, is the man who inspired former Intel in-house lawyer Peter Detkin to coin the term &#8220;patent troll&#8221; a decade ago, referring to Brown, his company TechSearch, and their lawyer, Raymond Niro.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202511464195&amp;rss=cc" title="'Original Patent Troll' is Back After Long Hiatus, With a New Name and New Patents">'Original Patent Troll' is Back After Long Hiatus, With a New Name and New Patents</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/original-patent-troll-long-hiatus-patents/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>IP: Whack a troll</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip-whack-troll/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip-whack-troll/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2011 07:08:08 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Risk Management & Compliance]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=6157</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Federal Circuit affirms sanctions for frivolous patent licensing campaign.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>The Federal Circuit affirms sanctions for a frivolous patent licensing campaign.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/insidecounsel/~3/OQYYxOnmufg/ip-whack-a-troll" title="IP: Whack a troll">IP: Whack a troll</a> at InsideCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/ip-whack-troll/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Kodak Tries to Protect Digital IP Portfolio with &#8216;Poison Pill&#8217; Plan</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/kodak-protect-digital-ip-portfolio-poison-pill-plan/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/kodak-protect-digital-ip-portfolio-poison-pill-plan/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:17:10 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Law.com</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Corporate/M&A]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=4122</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>As the shift from film to digital imaging has crippled Kodak's share price, the company has adopted a so-called "poison pill" to protect it from an unsolicited takeover while it tries to find a buyer for its substantial IP assets.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>As the shift from film to digital imaging has crippled Kodak&#8217;s share price, the company has adopted a so-called &#8220;poison pill&#8221; to protect it from an unsolicited takeover while it tries to find a buyer for its substantial IP assets.</p><p>[via: <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202509301859&amp;rss=cc" title="Kodak Tries to Protect Digital IP Portfolio with 'Poison Pill' Plan">Kodak Tries to Protect Digital IP Portfolio with 'Poison Pill' Plan</a> at CorpCounsel]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/kodak-protect-digital-ip-portfolio-poison-pill-plan/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Google&#8217;s $900 Million Hedge vs. Patent Plaintiffs</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/googles-900-million-hedge-patent-plaintiffs/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/googles-900-million-hedge-patent-plaintiffs/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 23:48:22 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Law.com</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/2011/04/googles-900-million-hedge-patent-plaintiffs.html</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>Google, which has been reeled into the smartphone patent wars via its Android operating system, has gobbled up a huge IP portfolio to use as leverage against would-be plaintiffs. [via Google's $900 Million Hedge vs. Patent Plaintiffs] Like this post? Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>Google, which has been reeled into the smartphone patent wars via its Android operating system, has gobbled up a huge IP portfolio to use as leverage against would-be plaintiffs.</p><p>[via <a
href="http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202489150670&#038;rss=cc">Google's $900 Million Hedge vs. Patent Plaintiffs</a>]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/googles-900-million-hedge-patent-plaintiffs/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>Beware of the Trademark Bully</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beware-trademark-bully/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beware-trademark-bully/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 10:24:48 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=1563</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>There is a new breed of bully on the block &#8211; as Steven Baird of the popular DuetsBlog points out. [via The Mark of a Real Trademark Bully : Duets Blog] Like this post? Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>There is a new breed of bully on the block &#8211; as Steven Baird of the popular <em>DuetsBlog</em> points out.</p><p>[via <a
href="http://www.duetsblog.com/2010/10/articles/the-mark-of-a-real-trademark-bully/">The Mark of a Real Trademark Bully : Duets Blog</a>]</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/beware-trademark-bully/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>All Things Trademarks at DuetsBlog</title><link>http://www.inhouseblog.com/keeping-trademarks/</link> <comments>http://www.inhouseblog.com/keeping-trademarks/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:41:22 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Editors</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[News]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhouseblog.com/?p=1398</guid> <description><![CDATA[<p>If you are handling trademark issues at your company or just want to get more familiar with an interesting area of intellectual property law, you should check out DuetsBlog from Winthrop &#038; Weinstine, P.A. The authors regularly post informative pieces on trademark issues and trends. Here are a few posts to check out: - How [...]</p><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>If you are handling trademark issues at your company or just want to get more familiar with an interesting area of intellectual property law, you should check out <a
href="http://www.duetsblog.com/">DuetsBlog</a> from Winthrop &#038; Weinstine, P.A.  The authors regularly post informative pieces on trademark issues and trends.  Here are a few posts to check out:</p><p>- <a
href="http://www.duetsblog.com/2010/02/articles/another-marketing-pitfall-how-to-crush-a-smashing-brand-name-trademark/">How to Crush a Smashing Brand Name Trademark</a></p><p>- <a
href="http://www.duetsblog.com/2009/05/articles/staying-on-the-right-side-of-the-line-suggestive-vs-descriptive/">Staying on the Right Side of the Line &#8211; Suggestive vs. Descriptive</a></p><p>- <a
href="http://www.duetsblog.com/2009/04/articles/a-legal-perspective-on-the-pros-and-cons-of-name-styles/#more ">A Legal Perspective on the Pros and Cons of Name Styles</a></p><p>Enjoy and don&#8217;t forget to subscribe to their blog if you enjoy the posts!</p><p>Like this post? <b><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com/subscribe">Subscribe to InhouseBlog's FREE weekly email newsletter.</a></b> Unsubscribe at any time.<span
id="pty_trigger"></span><p><a
href="http://www.inhouseblog.com">InhouseBlog.com</a></p>]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.inhouseblog.com/keeping-trademarks/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> </channel> </rss>
