The IPilogue is IP Osgoode’s online journal of IP Law and Technology. It publishes analysis and commentary on current pressing intellectual property, technology, privacy and related legal issues. The IPilogue features curated contributions from students, scholars, and experts within the Osgoode community, from our network of affiliated researchers and partners, as well as from professionals and scholars in disciplines outside of law.
Editor in Chief: Prof. Carys Craig (ccraig@osgoode.yorku.ca)
Submission inquiries: iposgoode@osgoode.yorku.ca
August 13, 2008 was a day of vindication for plaintiff Robert Jacobsen, as the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in vacating and remanding a U.S. District Court decision, held that an “open source” software [1] copyright license can be enforceable. Jacobsen oversees the Java Model Railroad Interface (“JRMI”) project, which created DecoderPro, […]
On August 25, 2008, a New Zealand Judge made the unprecedented decision of banning publication of the names and images of the persons on a murder charge on news websites, while allowing newspapers, TV and radio to name them and publish photos.[1] The issue is whether banning online reporting could lead to infringement of copyright. […]
YouTube: Platform For Exchange of Original Videos or Copyright Infringement? In a suit filed by Viacom against Google for alleged illegal distribution of its copyrighted content, the Court has ordered YouTube to provide its logging database for discovery purposes. Viacom seeks access to this database in order to show that most YouTube viewers are […]
In August Canadian Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart spoke about the growing concerns surrounding the online publication of federal tribunal decisions containing the personal information of individuals.[1] Tribunals routinely publish the full text of their decisions online. Stoddart’s comments are part of a growing debate that pits the long standing “open court” rule against the rights of […]
On February 6th, 2008, the Ohio Supreme Court in Al Minor & Assoc. v. Martin,[1] held that memorized information can fall within the scope of trade secrets in accordance to the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA). The court’s desire to discard the written-memorized information distinction was principally to align the UTSA with like acts from […]
A U.S. appellate court recently held in Jacobsen v. Katzer that copyright holders who dedicate their work for free public use are entitled to enforce an open-source copyright license to restrict the work's future distribution and modification. The Court ruled that open-source licenses are enforceable under copyright law, not merely under contract law, thereby providing […]
This is a time of significant innovation in the realm of business to reduce inefficiencies and capture potential market gains. Despite the significant barriers that currently exist, innovators should be able to protect these new and useful innovations through patents. Firstly, according to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), business methods are prohibited from patentability: […]
One of the comments I received on my last privacy post from Reshika Dhir rhetorically questioned whether users of cloud computing applications had a choice in not using these services to reduce their privacy risks. I agree with Reshika that many individuals in first-world countries have come to the point of technology dependence. To add […]
Andrew Knight, a US novelist and a patent agent, was the first to apply for a patent on the unique plot of his novel. Although the US patent office rejected Knight’s application, the author intends to appeal to the Federal Circuit. Knight espouses that patent protection is crucial because copyrights are not enough to keep […]
A Kentucky Judge has upheld his earlier order allowing the Commonwealth of Kentucky to seize 141 gambling related domain names because they allow residents of Kentucky to access gambling sites. The State argued that each of the domain names fell within the meaning of a “gambling device” under state law KRS 528.010(4) and were thus […]