The Intellectual Property Forum

May interest some readers...
http://cryptome.org/don071204.htm

Mad cap patents ranging from protecting a method of painting by dipping a baby's bottom into paint or a system for keeping track of people queuing for the bathroom may soon be a thing of the past if the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has its way. - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3722509.stm

Major labels had assumed that common law and/or state law would protect such recordings from "piracy." Given this SDNY ruling, that may be in serious doubt. Of course this would apply only to pre-1972 recordings of pre-1923 scores. (e.g. classical, folk, and ragtime)

Here is a statement from the firm who represented the defendant:
http://www.salans.com/news/NY082003_wins.cfm

Here are two unrelated sites who apparently see the ruling as an open door:

http://www.r-vcr.com/mp3pd/
http://www.perfessorbill.com/albums/pbrec4.shtml

Anybody know of similar cases in other districts or appeals? What do you have to say on the subject? If the labels don't want to reissue the recordings, why should others not? The ruling found that it was not unfair competition, nor copyright infringement.

03 May 2004

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

U.S. Releases 2004 Report on Intellectual Property Protection

Ukraine cited as "priority foreign country" in Special 301 report

The United States' annual review of global intellectual property rights (IPR) violations once again cites Ukraine for its continued failure to protect media products such as compact discs (CDs) and digital versatile discs (DVDs) from piracy.

In a May 3 news release, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) said its "Special 301" report for 2004 lists 52 countries or economies for IPR-related problems but only Ukraine is designated a "priority foreign country."

The annual Special 301 report, mandated by the U.S. Trade Act of 1988, said that many developing countries and new members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are making progress toward implementing their anti-counterfeiting obligations under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). But USTR added that problems remain, particularly in the area of enforcement.

Regarding Ukraine, USTR said that the country's "persistent failure" to act effectively against the pirating of optical media and to implement IPR-related laws could jeopardize Ukraine's efforts to join the WTO. Ukraine will continue to be designated a Priority Foreign Country and the $75 million in sanctions imposed on Ukrainian products on January 2002 will remain in place, USTR said.

USTR placed 33 trading partners on the "watch list" for IPR violations: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Poland, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Slovak Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Vietnam.

Another 16 trading partners are on the "priority watch list," which entails greater scrutiny. Eleven of these -- Argentina, Bahamas, Brazil, EU, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, Philippines, Poland, Russia and Taiwan -- were on last year's priority list. The other five -- Egypt, Korea, Kuwait, Pakistan and Turkey -- were moved this year from the watch list to the priority list.

USTR again designated China and Paraguay for "Section 306" monitoring. Being placed under Section 306 monitoring means that the USTR can move directly to the application of trade sanctions against either country if monitoring shows a slippage in enforcement of bilateral intellectual property rights agreements.

The USTR news release also noted some positive developments in global adherence to IPR enforcement. These include the passage of new legislation on protecting optical discs in Poland and the Philippines, and recent moves in Romania to ensure procurement of legitimate software for use in government ministries. USTR also noted that Malaysia, Poland and Taiwan have begun to increase their IPR enforcement measures.

To read the text of the USTR news release followed by the Special 301 executive summary, click here:

http://cryptome.org/ustr050304.htm
(server a bit slow lately)

Any of you patent experts want to venture a guess which part of the claims will be struck down?

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Jan/gee20040120023507.htm