Intellectual Property Issues in Consulting Frederic M. Wilf Wilftek LLC Philadelphia Consultants Network October 1, 2013 With and Without a Contract Provision With Without Copyright ownership Client or Consultant owns Consultant owns Copyright license Client owns or irrevocable license Non-exclusive, revocable Warranties Disclaim warranties; created limited warranty of repair to correct to specs Implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, all in addition to express warranties in specs Process issues As stated Open to interpretation Governing law & disputes As stated (name a state, choose litigation or arbitration) Open (look at states bearing the closest relationship to the transaction) Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. • U.S. Supreme Court, No. 11-697, March 19, 2013 • First Sale Doctrine, 17 USC §109(a): • The owner of a copy “lawfully made under this title” is entitled to sell or dispose of the copy • Question is whether this provisions applies to copies made and sold outside the U.S. How it works • First Sale Doctrine “exhausts” the copyright owner’s rights once the object containing the copy is sold • Purchaser of a book, audio CD, movie DVD may sell, modify or dispose of the copy • Publishers argue that copies made and sold overseas more cheaply than in U.S. may not be imported, even if content is the same Facts • Kirtsaeng bought copies of U.S. texts made and sold in Thailand, imported them to the U.S. and sold them in the U.S. • Kirtsaeng made net profit of about $100,000 • Publisher sued, alleging copies made outside the U.S. are not subject to U.S. law, even if the original is subject to a U.S. copyright, and copies licensed by U.S. publisher to a foreign subsidiary District Court • District Court held foreign-made goods not subject to U.S. Copyright Act, including First Sale Doctrine • District Court awarded $600,000 in statutory damages Second Circuit • Second Circuit upheld District Court’s decision • Read “lawfully made under this title” as geographic location of manufacture • Dissent focused on whether copy was made lawfully under U.S. Copyright Act Supreme Court • After winning in District Court and Second Circuit, publisher was joined by Solicitor General and several amici, focusing First Sale Doctrine on geography • …where the Copyright Act is applicable • … applies only to copies made in U.S. • … First Sale Doctrine does not apply foreign production for exclusive distribution outside the U.S. Kirtsaeng argues • Focuses on non-geographical interpretations • “lawfully made under this title” means “in accordance with” or “in compliance with” U.S. law Supreme Court holds… • Non-geographic interpretation applies • “lawfully made under this title” means made with permission granted pursuant to U.S. copyright law • Nothing in the First Sale Doctrine limits the phrase geographically • There’s no “where” there • Review of statutory history confirms nongeographical interpretation Why we care • Currently easier than ever to transport copyright-protected goods around the world • Even easier to sell goods around the world • Publishers’ attempts to Balkanize copyrightprotected goods increases costs and administrative burdens Ways to marginalize the First Sale Doctrine • First Sale applies to copies made and sold by or on behalf of the copyright owner • Does not apply to licensed copies • Put clickwraps and shrinkwraps around content • DMCA provides cause of action against breaking of digital rights management • DVD movies are region-encoded WNET 13 v. Aereo, Inc. • Nos. 12-2786-cv, 12-2807-cv (April 1, 2013) • Aereo captures broadcast TV transmissions over the air, and stores them for Internet transmission • Users watch recorded copies (even live) • Each user gets one antenna and one copy • Aereo charges a monthly fee Public performance right / Transmit • Copyright owner has an exclusive right to “perform the copyrighted work publicly” • Includes broadcast transmissions • Copyright owners argued recording and retransmission was a public performance • Aereo argued that making one copy for each user is similar to the VCR in Sony v. Universal, and like the RS-DVR in Cablevision Analogy to Cablevision • In Cablevision, cable company created an infrastructure inside the cable system that made one copy of each work at each user’s request • Aereo does the same thing with over the air broadcasts • Plaintiffs argued whether or not copies are made, the system is designed to provide real-time transmissions • Second Circuit holds… • If transmission can be received by the public at large, it’s a public performance • If transmission is received by one person, it’s not a public performance • Private transmissions should not be aggregated, or that will begin to look like a public performance • Thus, copying the Cablevision technology leads to a decision of no infringement Effect of Aereo decision • It seems silly and inefficient to deploy one antenna and one DVR recording for each user for each program, but the Copyright Act and the courts still think inside the VCR box of Sony v. Universal • Until there’s legislation that expressly allows the making of second-generation copies for rebroadcast and retransmission (if ever), then startups are building VCR equivalents New gTLDs move closer to reality • Many companies have paid handsomely for a chance at a new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) • Would you like a .dog, .delmonte, .transformers or other domain name? • Multiple languages • Multiple scripts Objection Period • Initial period to object to pending applications just ended • Types of objections • String confusion objection • Existing legal rights objection • Limited public interest objection • Community objection • Dispute resolution providers will decide Trademark Clearing House (TMCH) • May register trademarks in the TMCH to prevent registration of new gTLDs that infringe your client’s marks • Used in both “sunrise” of gTLDs and ongoing trademark conflicts On the Horizon • Will the Google Books case ever settle? • Ass’n of American Publishers settled with Google • Author’s Guild has not settled • Orphan works • http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2012/77f r64555.pdf (Oct. 22, 2012) • Continued access to underlying technology • Word processors, paint programs, hardware, media readers Questions and (Some) Answers Thank you! Frederic M. Wilf Wilftek LLC 215 205 0059 fred@wilftek.com Huntingdon Valley, Pa. www.linkedin.com/in/fwilf