Lewis & ClarkLaw School

Intellectual Property Students Organization

OIPN Newsletter Index

OIPN Spring 2009
  • Observations on the Google Books Settlement
  • Patent Office Power: Tafas v. Doll, and Next Steps
  • Asset Marketing Systems, Inc. v. Gagnon
  • Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. King Mountain Tobacco Company, Inc.
  • Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp.
  • United States v. Klimecek
  • Mattel, Inc. v. MGA Entertainment, Inc.

OIPN Fall 2008
  • Statutory Uncertainty at Both Ends of a Copyright Infringement Case
  • Developments in the Extra-Territorial Enforcement of U.S. Patents
  • Honorable Pierre Leval as Distinguished IP Visitor
  • Cartoon Network LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc.
  • United States v. Whitehead
  • Board of Regents, U. of Texas ex. rel. U. of Texas at Austin v. KST Electric, LTD
  • Jacobsen v. Katzer
OIPN Spring 2008
  • Key Word Advertising Using Tradmarked Terms: Fair or Foul?
  • Sitrick v. Dreamworks, LLC
  • Doe v. Geller
  • Halliburton Energy Services v. M-I LLC
  • Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC
  • Riviera Distributors, Inc. v. Jones

OIPN Spring 2007
  • Re-Thinking the Admissibility of Non-Prior Art as Evidence of the Level of Skill in the Art to Support an Obviousness Defense in Patent Litigation
  • The Effect of MedImmune on Using the Declaratory Judgment Act to Challenge a Licensed Patent
  • Patent Claim Construction: The Neglected Preamble
  • Kahle v. Gonzales

OIPN Fall 2006
  • Open Source In Practice: From Idea To Market To Your Desk
  • Bringing FOSS Into The Enterprise: Thoughts On "Best Practices"
  • Open Source in M&A and Other Transactions
  • Implied Patent Rights and Open Source Software
  • Harald Welte, Linux, and the GPL
  • Semi-Open Source: The Case for Hybrid Licensing
  • Trademark Enforcement for National Brands Made Easier – Not So For Others: Significant Changes to Trademark Dilution Act Signed into Law
OIPN Spring 2006
  • Preserving the Exculpatory Value of an Opinion Letter
  • Field v. Google, Inc
  • Is Something Amiss? A Commentary on the Aftermath of Phillips v. AWH Corp
  • Contractual Restrictions on Paired Patented Goods
  • IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc.

OIPN Fall 2005
  • Davidson & Associates v. Jung
  • The Revival of the Prosecution Laches
  • Defense Against Patent Infringement: Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson
    Medical, Education & Research Foundation, L.P.
  • Open Source Software— Pandemic or Panacea?
  • Claim Indefiniteness in Two Patent Infringement Suits: Datamize, LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc. and Marley Mouldings Limited v. Mikron Industries, Inc.
  • Government Employees Insurance Co. v. Google, Inc.
OIPN Spring 2005
  • This Land Belongs to All of Us
  • Sarbanes-Oxley Act – The IP Audit & Strategy Development Process
  • C.R.E.A.T.E. Act Provides a Safe Harbor for Joint Research Projects
  • Grupo Gigante S.A. de C.V. v. Dallo & Co.
  • Star Fruits S.N.C. and Institute of Experimental Botany v. United States and Department of Commerce
  • KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc.

OIPN Fall 2004
  • Sixth Circuit Abolishes De Minimis Use Doctrine for Sound Recording Copyright Infringement: A Note on Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films
  • TRIPS, Doha and Pharmaceuticals
  • In re Wilhem Elsner
  • Knorr-Bremse Systeme v. Dana Corp.
  • In re Alberto Lee Bigio
  • Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc v. Grokster Ltd.
OIPN Spring 2004
  • Of Teapots and Cool Coffee Cups: Exploring the Possibilities of Copyright Protection for Useful Objects and Industrial Designs
  • When IPR Meets PGR in Oregon Agriculture
  • Ellison v. Robertson and AOL
  • Golight v. Wal-Mart
  • Mattel Inc. v. Walking Mountain Productions
  • Anthony J. DeGidio v. West Group Corporation; The Thomson Corporation; West Licensing Corporation

OIPN Fall 2003
  • The Clear Disavowal Case: Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa North America Corp.
  • Authors’ Claims for Reverse Passing Off under of the Lanham Act after Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
  • Another Fall, Another Festo
  • Contractually Prohibiting Bad Reviews? Copyright Misuse to the Rescue, Maybe...
  • In Re Coors Brewing Co.
  • Gordon v. Nextel Communications
  • Minton v. Nat’l Ass’n of Sec. Dealers
  • Nitro Leisure Products, L.L.C. (d.b.a. Golfballsdirect.com and Second Chance) v. Acushnet Co.
OIPN Spring 2003
  • Stem Cell and Collateral Biomedical Developments after the Bush Administration Restraints
  • The Uncertain Inventor Case: Space Systems/Loral Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
  • From Here to Eternity (Minus One): Eldred and the Mouse That Devoured The Public Domain?
  • Inadequacy of Current Patent Schemes in Biomedical Context
  • Presentation Summary of IP Distinguished Visitor, Honorable Ronald M. Whyte
  • Recent Decisions, Moseley v. Victoria's Secret Catalogue, Inc., Cort v. Saint Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Companies, Inc., Adidas-Salomon Ag v. Target Corp., Microsoft Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

OIPN Fall 2002
  • A Test for the Right of Publicity: Comedy III Productions v. Saderup
  • Losing the Security Blanket: The (Inexorable) Move Away From Blanket Licenses for Commercial Radio
  • The Top Ten Internet Stories of the Past Year
  • Border Crossing: IP and UPL
  • Recent Decisions: Ty, Inc. v. Publications Intern. Ltd., Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft, Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys., Inc.
OIPN Spring 2002
  • Digital Millennium Copyright Act: Do Two New Cases Establish the Standard for Enforcement?
  • Legislation to Watch: The Proposed Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act
  • The Historical Roots of Patent Prosecution Laches
  • American Indian and Tribal Intellectual Property Rights
  • Strategic Planning For Intellectual Property
  • Initial Interest Confusion in the Context of Internet Domain Names: A Primer of Recent Cases and Suggestions for Creative Resolutions to this Brand of Trademark Dispute
  • The Laws of Employee Invention Assignments Abroad: A Word of Caution for the U.S. Corporation with Foreign Inventor-Employees
  • Recent Decisions:Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., Ford v. Greatdomains.com, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. v. J.E.M. AG Supply, Inc. Symbol Techs., Inc. v. Lemelson Med., Educ. & Research Found., L.P.

OIPN Fall 2001
  • Uniform Electronic Transactions Act in Oregon
  • Stake Your Claim on a New Domain
  • The Complicated World of Music Copyrights and Webcasting
  • Third Annual Distinguished Intellectual Property Visitor: Pamela Samuelson, Fall 2001
  • Recent Decisions: New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini, Downing v.Abercrombie & Fitch
OIPN Spring 2001
  • An Interview with the Honorable Paul R. Michel, Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • Festo: Past, Present, and Future of the Doctrine of Equivalents
  • Antitrust Developments Affecting the New Economy: U.S. v. Microsoft and Beyond
  • Case Summaries, Clark v. America Online, Inc., Konop v. Hawaiian Airlines, Tasini v. New York Times Co., Veeck v. Southern Bldg. Code Congress Int’l
  • Patent Infringement Litigation in the District of Oregon (“Markman Watch”)

OIPN Fall 2000
  • Case Summaries, Heathmount A.E. Corp. v. Technodome.com, PerSeptive Biosystems, Inc. v. Pharmacia Biotech, Inc., UMG Recordings, Inc. v. MP3.com, Inc., Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes
  • Federal Privacy Regulation of the Telecommunications and Cable Industry
  • Intellectual Property Essay Contest Winners
  • RIAA v. MP3.COM
OIPN Spring 2000
  • Patent Rights Quiz
  • Interview with Professor Eisenberg
  • Safe Harbors from the Stormy Seas of Copyright Infringement Litigation
  • Federal Circuit Case Summaries, Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, Inc. v. J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc., In re Gartside

OIPN Fall 1999
  • To Tag or Not To Tag – That Is the (Meta) Question
  • 1999 Intellectual Property Section Essay Contest Winners

Contact Us

The Intellectual Property Sudents Organizations is located in The Lewis & Clark Law School.

email ipso@lclark.edu

President Nicolo Davidson