On July 7, 2008, an Israeli composer filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studio, Inc., Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC and Cinram, Inc. involving compositions utilized in the film “Snow White” in 1987 by Cannon Films, which was acquired by MGM.

The lawsuit states composer Arik Rudich created and contributed the compositions to the film but never received a contract regarding use of the compositions, even after requests for one.

Rudich seeks $4.7 million in damages in addition to attorney fees.

On July 14, 2008, a federal judge ruled that eBay Inc. is not legally responsible for its users selling counterfeit items. The ruling comes four years after the trademark suit was filed by Tiffany and Co., who alleged most of the Tiffany items sold on eBay were counterfeits. Tiffany argued eBay aided trademark infringement by allowing the sale of counterfeit items.

The ruling reaffirms that online companies are not legally obligated to monitor their websites for trademarked violations, that ultimately trademark owners must protect their marks. eBay’s procedure for removing allegedly infringing material upon notice by trademark owner was deemed adequate.

eBay recently was ordered by a French court to pay $60 million to LVMH, which makes Louis Vuitton handbags, in a similar trademark lawsuit. In April 2008, a German appeals court ruled eBay must be active in preventing the sale of counterfeit Rolex watches.

On July 9, 2008, Boston Scientific Corporation’s request for a new trial in a patent infringement lawsuit was denied and the $501 million verdict stands.

In February 2008, a jury awarded Saffran $501 million in damages from Boston Scientific’s sale of its heart stents, found to be infringing on Saffran’s patented technology. Boston Scientific plans to appeal the judge’s ruling.

In early July 2008, WordLogic Corporation initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Mercedes-Benz USA over the company’s use of a car navigation system. The lawsuit alleges that the company willfully infringed on its patent titled “Data Entry for Personal Computing Devices” (US Patent No. 7,293,231).

WordLogic is seeking back royalties and injunction against Mercedes-Benz’s use of the infringing navigation systems, in addition to triple damages.

WordLogic is a technology company that delivers interface solutions for personal computing devices.

A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey will likely cause a delay in a generic version of the drug Seroquel, a drug utilized in treating schizophrenia, from entering the US market. AstraZeneca prevailed in its motion for summary judgment against Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Sandoz, a unit of Novartis AG. The Court held that AstraZeneca had not obtained its patent for the drug through inequitable conduct and that the patent was valid. The issue of inequitable conduct was the only issue remaining in the case, since the issue of infringement and invalidity had already been conceded and jointly resolved in AstraZeneca’s favor.

In light of the ruling, introduction of the generic version of the drug proposed by Teva and Sandoz will be delayed. Teva stated it planned to appeal the decision.

On June 26, 2008, Saxon Innovations, LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple, Inc., Acer, Inc., Dell, Inc., Gateway, Inc. and Hewlett-Packard Co., alleging the companies violated several of its patents related to wireless communications. The patents relate to various aspects of wireless communications, including privacy, a clock generator for shutdown mode, disability interrupt masks, and key pad monitors.

Saxon Innovations LLC is a licensing company for intellectual property related to various technologies including communications and computers.

Several high-tech companies are joining together to buy intellectual property before others do in an attempt to prevent future patent infringement lawsuits against them. Verizon Communications Inc., Google Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., Telefon AB L.M. Ericsson, and Hewlett-Packard are several of the companies that have joined the group, named Allied Security Trust Co.

The group, which will require companies to pay about $250,000 to join the group, plans to buy patents that others may use to bring patent infringement claims against the companies that are members. Companies will each contribute about $5 million into escrow with the group that will go towards purchasing patents in the future.

After the companies acquire the patents, they will grant themselves nonexclusive licenses to the underlying technology, and will subsequently sell the patents. The group states it does not intend to enforce the patents to make money for the group.

The formation of Allied Security Trust comes after a rise in patent-related lawsuits since 1990: As reported by The Coalition for Patent Fairness, approximately 2,500 patent-related lawsuits were filed in the first 10 months of 2007, as compared to 921 in the 12 months of 1990.

In June 2008, Typhoon Touch Technologies expanded its patent infringement lawsuit against Dell, Inc. to include Apple, Toshiba, Palm and several other companies, claiming they infringed on its patents relating to touch screen technology.

Typhoon holds two patents (U.S. Patent 5,379,057 and U.S. Patent 5,675,362) both entitled “Portable Computer with Touch Screen and Computer Screen Employing Same.” The company claims devices having touchscreen interfaces, like certain phones, PDAs and personal computers may be impacted by the patents.

The patent infringement lawsuit was originally filed against Dell in December 2007. The company previously reached out-of-court settlements with Motion Computing and Electovaya, and said the case could extend to millions of other devices currently on the market.

On April 29, 2008, FullView, Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft, Corp., claiming Microsoft’s RoundTable conferencing product infringes on its patent covering a camera system that creates 360-degree videos.

FullView also claims Microsoft knew about its patent in 2003, the year before FullView was awarded the patent in March 2004. In its own patent application filed in 2002, Microsoft cites FullView’s patent.

In its lawsuit, FullView requests the court require Microsoft to stop selling RoundTable and award FullView triple damages.

Vic Nalwa, president of FullView, said he devised the original camera while working for Bell Labs in 1995, and co-founded FullView in 2000.

On June 16, 2008, Nuance Communications filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Vlingo Corp., claiming the company infringed on its patent related to a speech recognition system for mobile devices. The suit claims Vlingo’s speech recognition software system infringes Nuance’s patent and seeks damages, attorney fees and an injunction. Vlingo’s software is utilized in Yahoo’s oneSearch with Voice product.

Vlingo’s chief technology officer and co-founder, Michael Phillips, is a former Nuance employee who started Vlingo approximately one year after he left Nuance.

Vlingo states the patent infringement lawsuit is unfounded, and claims the patent has limited coverage of questionable validity.

On September 14, 2007, a jury in the Delaware District Court ruled in favor of TruePosition, Inc. in a patent infringement lawsuit against Andrew Corporation. The jury found Andrew Corp. willfully infringed on a mobile device patent owned by TruePosition’s patent related to determining the position of mobile devices.

The jury agreed that Andrew Corp. had intentionally infringed TruePosition’s patent, which enabled the jury to award TruePosition triple damages.

On June 11, 2008, Tellabs Operation, Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Fujitsu Limited and Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc., alleging the company infringed its patent, 7,369,772, awarded in May 2008. Tellabs’ patent relates to optical terminal arrangements.

Fujitsu’s FLASHWAVE products are alleged to be infringed in the suit. Tellabs is seeking monetary damages and an injunction against Fujitsu.

On March 28, 2008, Audiovox Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Invision Industries Inc., alleging the company infringed on three patents relating to vehicle rear-seat entertainment systems.

Audiovox Corp., a consumer electronics and in-vehicle entertainment company, filed the lawsuit in New York Eastern District Court. Invision Industries also offers in-vehicle entertainment products.

Oerlikon Solar has filed a patent infringement lawsuit in Germany against Sunfilm AG, alleging the company violated its patent for its micromorph tandem cell technology used in the manufacturing of thin-film solar panels.

Sunfilm announced in 2007 its plans to begin business in the thin-film solar panel business, and has since set up a production line and purchased equipment from California-based Applied Materials.

Oerlikon, which acquired the technology in 2003 from the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland, claims its intellectual property is being willfully infringed upon. Earlier in 2008, Orelikon sent a warning letter to Sunfilm about its plans to make large tandem junction solar panels.

The patent focuses on the design and engineering of the panels. Oerlikon seeks an injunction against Sunfilm.

On June 9, 2008, Memorylink Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Motorola Inc. alleging Motorola intentionally infringed on a patent and defrauded the company by using its invention related to wireless video technology used in electronics like cell phones and security cameras.

The patent infringement lawsuit seeks damages from the profits Motorola gained over several years while utilizing and selling the technology. Memorylink also seeks an injunction against Motorola and seeks to gain patent ownership.

Memorylink’s complaint states its founder Peter Strandwitz is the inventor of the technology and had contact with Motorola in a discussion of the invention in 1997. Strandwitz and a Memorylink director, Robert Kniskern, allegedly signed confidentiality agreements and memorandums of understanding with Motorola to together develop the wireless technology.

The lawsuit claims Strandwitz and Kniskern relied on Motorola for intellectual property matters and unknowingly relinquished a “significant portion” of their patents rights to Motorola for free. Motorola ceased working with Memorylink on wireless video transmission technology in April 2003.

On May 20, 2008, Man & Machine Inc. filed an intellectual property lawsuit against Apple Inc., CBS Corporation and CBS Operations Inc., seeking an injunction against Apple’s use of the mark MIGHTY MOUSE on computer mouse products.

Man & Machine, a 20-employee company based in Maryland, said it developed and sold its computer mouse by 2004, more than a year before Apple began selling a similar device with the same name, in August 2005.

The lawsuit also seeks an invalidation of the Apple-CBS licensing agreement, and a declaration that Man & Machine’s use of the mark does not dilute CBS’ mark.

CBS’ subsidiary already owns the mark in reference to clothing and toys, but filed a computer-related trademark application for the mark in 2007. Man & Machine is also opposing CBS’ application to trademark “Mighty Mouse” for this use.

A federal jury awarded Cornell University $184 million in a patent infringement lawsuit against Hewlett Packard Company. In the intellectual property lawsuit, Cornell alleged Hewlett Packard infringed its patent related to increased computer speed, which was invented by Professor Hwa Torng, in the 1980’s. Hewlett Packard has said it plans to appeal the verdict.

The Cornell professor’s invention was believed to have increased the efficiency and speed of computer processors significantly, and plaintiffs said Hewlett Packard received more than $36 billion in profits from using the professor’s invention without permission. The invention is still being used in modern computers.

Vice president for Cornell University communications said the verdict may make the case a fundamental one for all universities in terms of protecting intellectual property.

In December 2007, a jury awarded Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and Dr. David Goldfarb $185 million in damages in a patent infringement lawsuit against W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.

Dr. Goldfarb and others filed for a patent on a prosthetic vascular graft in 1974, and were issued the patent in 2002. The group later became Bard Peripheral Vascular.

The intellectual property lawsuit alleged that some of W.L. Gore & Associates’ vascular grafts and stent-grafts infringed upon the Bard patent. In response, W.L. Gore & Associates, however, claimed the patent was invalid and unenforceable.

The jury in the patent infringement lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, found the patent valid and that W.L. Gore & Associates had willfully infringed the patent. Bard Peripheral Vascular was awarded $102,081,578,82 in lost profits and $83,508,292.20 in royalties.

The court has yet to determine whether the patent may be unenforceable due to defendant’s assertion of inequitable conduct by plaintiff.

On March 12, 2008, ZapMedia Services Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple, Inc., claiming the computer manufacturer used its media distribution inventions without its permission.

ZapMedia owns two patents entitled “System and method for distributing media assets to user devices via a portal synchronized by said user devices” and “System and method for distributing media assets to user devices and managing user rights of the media assets.” The patents involve the technology surrounding Apple’s iPod, iTunes, and iTunes store structure.

After filing for the first patent in 2000, ZapMedia said it extended its idea to several corporations, including Apple. The company said Apple then announced its similar system without asking for permission from ZapMedia.

The intellectual property lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.

On June 3, 2008, Vnus Medical Technologies, Inc. announced it agreed to settle a patent infringement lawsuit filed in 2005 against AngioDynamics and Vascular Solutions. As part of the settlement, Vnus will receive approximately $10 million as an upfront payment from the two companies and agrees to grand the companies a non-exclusive, non-sublicensable patent license that covers specific products related to endovenous laser ablation. AngioDynamics and Vascular Solutions stipulated the patents are valid, enforceable and were infringed.

The suit against the third defendant, Diomed, was stayed in light of Diomed’s Chaper 11 bankruptcy filing several months before trial.

On May 5, 2008, Ruckus Wireless filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Rayspan Corporation and its customer, NetGear. Ruckus develops industrial Wi-Fi systems, including Wi-Fi antenna arrays which are the subject of the asserted patents. The lawsuit alleges that Rayspan’s antenna solutions infringe two Ruckus patents and that NetGear’s wireless router products that incorporate the solutions area also infringing.

Rayspan has denied any infringement and stated it will vigorously defend against the claims. Ruckus designs, develops and markets industrial-strength Wi-Fi systems. It has over 70 intelligent antenna or wireless technology patents granted or pending worldwide.