Time Magazine just published it list of the top 50 inventions of 2009.  This is kind of a fun article that list the best and worst inventions of the year (according to the editors of Time!).  NASA won the best invention with their Ares Rockets (see picture below) .

You can read more about the best inventions, including NASA’s rockets here:  http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1934027_1934003,00.html.

The worst inventions are pretty terrible but you can look at the 5 worst here:  http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1934027_1934004,00.html.

Overall, this is an interesting and entertaining article and well worth a quick read (except you have to navigate their confusing format).

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/0,28757,1934027,00.html

An interesting article from Reuters today that was picked up by CNBC.com.  The Supreme Court today will hear opening arguments in a landmark patent case today.

Software, biotech firms and others who develop new ways to do business will be watching closely Monday as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case that could determine if such innovations can win patent protection.

The case itself involves a small Pittsburgh company called WeatherWise, founded by Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, to sell services based on hedging methods that allow users to make fixed energy payments even if usage or energy prices vary.

But when they tried to patent the hedging method, the U.S. patent office rejected it in 2000. The patent board upheld the rejection in 2006.

The battle continued up to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which in 1998 had broadened the definition of what was patentable to anything except laws of nature and abstract ideas.

But, after hearing the Bilski case, the court, which specializes in patent appeals, sought to set limits. It ruled that the hedging method could not be patented because it was not tied to a machine and did not result in a transformation.

The Federal Circuit decision threw doubt on tens of thousands of business method patents, like software patents and medical diagnostic patents. One of the best-known examples of a business method patent is Amazon.com’s [AMZN 126.37 0.17 (+0.13%) ] one-click process to buy goods on the Internet.

“I did some math this morning and the market cap of the companies that filed (friend of the court) briefs is $1.2 trillion,” said Marc Pernick, a patent attorney with law firm Morrison Foerster.

Some, like software and biotechnology companies, want the definition of what can be patented to be as broad as possible because they license out those processes. Others, like some financial institutions, want business method patents to be restricted to avoid getting sued.

Ruling Expected in 2010

The Supreme Court justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case on Monday, beginning at 1 p.m. EST. A decision is expected by the end of June.

Patent experts agree that, however the court rules, it will not simply affirm the Federal Circuit decision.

“The track record is that when the Supreme Court takes a case from the Federal Circuit that they see something they want to change,” said Pavan Agarwal, a patent attorney with law firm Foley and Lardner.

When the court has ruled on patent cases recently, it has tended to rule unanimously or nearly unanimously.

The high court ruled unanimously in 2008 in Quanta v. LG Electronics that patent rights were exhausted once a product was sold. A company could not sue a downstream purchaser for infringement.

In 2007, in KSR v. Teleflex, the court unanimously made it easier to show that an innovation was an obvious improvement on existing technology and, thus, should not have been patented.

In MedImmune v. Genentech, the court ruled in 2007 that a patent licensee need not stop paying royalties or otherwise breach a licensing agreement before challenging the validity of a patent. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented.

A 2006 Supreme Court ruling, eBay v. MercExchange, made it harder to win an injunction in the case of infringement.

WeatherWise co-founder Rand Warsaw estimated losses to his small company, because it could not patent the hedging method, at about $5 million a year.

“This lack of patent protection has given rise to competitors and given rise to companies who have taken our intellectual property. For other small companies this could have been a death blow,” he said.

See the rest of the story at CNBC.com
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33724662/?site=14081545

According to Inventors Digest -USPTO Director David Kappos has just announced a new plan to “Fast-Track” patent applications. According to the speech, given at the 14th Annual Inventors Conference (see link for more details http://uspto.gov/).

Inventors with two or more patent applications pending at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office can have one of their patents fast-tracked - “jumped to the head of the line,” in the words of USPTO director David Kappos - provided inventors abandon one of their less pressing applications.

http://www.inventorsdigest.com/?p=2094

According to a story published by the AP, Nokia, the world’s largest maker of cell phones, is suing Apple in U.S. federal court, saying the iPhone uses patented wireless technologies.Nokia Corp. claims the iPhone infringes on ten patents covering both phone calls and Wi-Fi access. It says 40 other phone manufacturers have licensed these patents from Nokia, but Apple hasn’t.

Apple Inc. didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment Thursday.

Companies that develop cell phone technology regularly sue each other over patents. The usual outcome is that the defendant agrees to pay licensing fees, or the parties agree to share each other’s patents.

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/high_tech/1700/10-22-2009/20091022093508_43.html

As promised - here is today’s entertaining Thanksgiving/turkey patent. The ornamental design for a turkey decoration, as shown and described in Design Patent 397,955.

You really need to open the patent to look at the drawings for this one! Enjoy…
U.S. Patent D 397,955  Turkey Decoration

As we move into the month of November and our thoughts move toward the glorious turkey feast in a few weeks - it is always fun to review some interesting Thanksgiving/turkey related patents (there are tons of them!). For the next week or so we will post a different patent each day to help get us ready for Thanksgiving!This one is great - U.S. Patent 5,289,654

Animated Wildfowl Decoy

Abstract

An animated decoy simulating the external appearance and certain head and neck movements of a wild turkey. The decoy is essentially hollow, and the neck includes a plurality of interconnected, longitudinal segments. In a first embodiment, the head and neck are pivotally movable in an up and down manner with respect to the body, and the head is movable in a twisting motion with respect to the neck. First and second motors, independently actuable by an RF transmitter, with appropriate motion transfer linkages, effect movement of the decoy parts. In a second embodiment, a motor is actuable in response to audible sounds, such as live or simulated turkey call, to effect pivotal up and down movement of the decoy head and neck.

Express Search wants to thank the staff at AIPLA for hosting a wonderful and successful conference in Washington DC last week.  As always, the conference was full of great speakers and offers a terrific way for IP practitioners to connect in person.

If you don’t attend any of AIPLA’s many conferences - you should consider doing so.  See the AIPLA link below!

http://www.aipla.org/

According to a recent article from Andrews Publication Corp., National Football League Hall of Famer Elvin Bethea and five other retired players are suing the league for allegedly profiting off their names, images and likenesses without permission.The players from the 1960s and 1970s say the NFL and its filmmaking arm, NFL Films, are exploiting retired players in films, highlight reels and memorabilia to market the league’s “glory days.”

The proposed class action says the NFL made more than $6.9 billion in 2008 alone off retired players by misappropriating their identities.

Bob Stein, an eight-year NFL veteran and attorney representing the players, said the evolution of television and channels like ESPN and the NFL Network has brought the issue front and center.

“Retired players who helped build the league and are being used to promote it today deserve to be paid for what they have contributed to generate money for the NFL,” Stein said in a statement.

This is an interesting story with some very serious consequences for the Nation Football League.  See link below for the rest of the article.

http://news.findlaw.com/andrews/bt/sel/20090831/20090831_nfl.html

An interesting article in the Associated Press today out of Malaysia.

According to the article (link below) McDonald’s lost an eight-year trademark battle to prevent local restaurant McCurry from using the ‘Mc’ prefix in a precedent-setting judgment by Malaysia’s highest court.The Federal Court ruled Tuesday that McDonald’s cannot appeal against another court’s verdict that had allowed McCurry to use ‘Mc’ in its name. The owner says McCurry, which serves Indian food, is an abbreviation for Malaysian Chicken Curry.

The ruling by a three-member panel of the Federal Court ends all legal avenues for McDonald’s to protect its name from what it said was a trademark infringement.

“On the basis of unanimous decision, our view is that” McDonald’s plea to carry the case forward has no merit, said chief judge Arifin Zakaria. “It is unfortunate that we have to dismiss the application with costs,” he said.

McDonald’s will have to pay 10,000 ringgit ($2,900) to McCurry, a popular eatery in Jalan Ipoh on the edge of Kuala Lumpur’s downtown. McDonald’s lawyers refused to comment, except to say the company will abide by the judgment.

McCurry lawyer Sri Devi Nair said the ruling means McDonald’s does not have a monopoly on the prefix ‘Mc,’ and that other restaurants could also use it as long as they distinguish their food from McDonald’s.

“This is a precedent for everyone to follow,” he said.

A three-member Appeal Court panel had ruled in favor of McCurry Restaurant in April this year when it overturned a 2006 high court ruling that had upheld McDonald’s contention.

Arifin said McDonald’s lawyers were unable to point out faults in the Appeal Court judgment, which had said there was no evidence to show that McCurry was passing off McDonald’s business as its own. The Appeals Court also said McDonald’s cannot claim an exclusive right to the ‘Mc’ prefix in the country.

McDonald’s asked the Federal Court for permission to appeal against that decision but was denied Tuesday.
http://news.findlaw.com/ap/f/1310/09-08-2009/20090908035009_56.html

During every election cycle stories like this pop up all the time. This is probably the first for the 2010 election cycle. A reporter for Andrews Publications reports on California state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore’s efforts to dismiss an infringement lawsuit filed by Don Henley over the Assemblyman’s use of two of Henley’s songs in campaign videos.

According to the article, the founding member of the Eagles says DeVore used his songs “The Boys of Summer” and “All She Wants to Do Is Dance” note for note and rewrote the lyrics to suit his campaign against Democrat Barbara Boxer for the U.S. Senate.

DeVore then posted video versions of the new songs on YouTube, according to the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Henley et al. v. DeVore et al., No. 09-481, 2009 WL 1147009, complaint filed (C.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2009).

But in a countersuit DeVore says the videos are parodies of the Henley hits and seeks a declaration that his campaign ads are protected under the fair-use doctrines of the federal Copyright Act and Lanham Act.

According to Henley’s complaint, he asked YouTube to remove DeVore’s infringing “Boys of Summer” video under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The Web site obliged but then put the video back up after DeVore and his director of Internet strategies, Justin Hart, challenged the song’s removal.

YouTube told Henley that it would remove the offending video again if he filed a lawsuit requesting such an action.

A couple of days after the “Boys of Summer” campaign video was reposted, DeVore and Hart posted another video, this time using Henley’s “All She Wants to Do Is Dance,” according to the complaint.

Henley says he “carefully selects the particular causes he wishes to endorse” and selectively licenses his exclusive copyrights.

The one-time Eagles front man adds in his lawsuit that he did not authorize DeVore or Hart to use his work and “does not wish his name or work to be associated” with DeVore or his campaign.

In his countersuit DeVore acknowledges that Henley uses his music to promote his liberal political views.

“Boys of Summer” is about the “essential failure of … [1960s] politics,” while “All She Wants to Do Is Dance” is about “Americans’ indifference to what Henley perceives to be the misconduct of the Reagan administration in providing money and materials to the Nicaraguan Contras,” according to DeVore.

So when he and Hart rewrote the lyrics to attack liberal policies in America, DeVore says, they were clearly parodying songs promoting liberal causes by a well-known liberal activist.

“Simply put, the parodies use political songs performed by a visible supporter of DeVore’s political opponents and turn the songs on their heads, promoting conservative political philosophies rather than the liberal politics found in the originals,” DeVore says in the countersuit.

DeVore adds that he and Hart have been injured by Henley’s accusations and are entitled to unspecified damages.

Henley et al. v. DeVore et al., No. 09-481, answer and counterclaims filed (C.D. Cal. July 16, 2009).

http://news.findlaw.com/andrews/bt/sel/20090730/20090730_devore.html