Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article showcasing five “patent cases to watch in the second half of 2023”;
- a blog post summarizing comments made by Judge Newman in her recent Bloomberg Podcast appearance;
- a blog post about the Federal Anti-Impersonation Right, a newly proposed “federal right of publicity” that “would establish a minimum level of protection against the unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name, image, likeness, or other identifying aspects of their persona”; and
- an article discussing recent and upcoming Supreme Court decisions in intellectual property cases.
Dani Kass authored an article for Law360 showcasing five “patent cases to watch in the second half of 2023.” She notes how, in the back half of this year, the “Federal Circuit will be reviewing its first en banc patent case since 2018, while the court’s members are being sued by its longest-serving judge, who claims that an attempt to oust her is unconstitutional.” See our case page for the details on the en banc design patent this article references.
Eileen McDermott wrote a blog post for IPWatchdog summarizing comments made by Judge Newman in her recent Bloomberg Podcast appearance. McDermott highlights how Newman called “Chief Judge Moore’s claims that she ‘had a heart attack, that she was hospitalized, had two stents put in and fainted in the courthouse “absolutely false.”’” McDermott points out how “Bloomberg said they invited Moore to participate in the podcast,” but “she declined” the invitation.
Dennis Crouch wrote a blog post for PatentlyO about the Federal Anti-Impersonation Right, a newly proposed “federal right of publicity” that “would establish a minimum level of protection against the unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name, image, likeness, or other identifying aspects of their persona.” He suggests the “origins of publicity rights stem from privacy protections rather than commerce” and suggests this “conceptual difference from trademark law is important.” He further explains that, due to this conceptual difference, he “would suggest that any federal right should consider personal dignity and reputational interests, not just economic harms from impersonation.”
Nicole Jantzi and Paul Schoenhard authored an article for Bloomberg Law discussing recent and upcoming Supreme Court decisions in intellectual property cases. They note how what “seemed like a quiet term from an intellectual property perspective finished with a flurry, as the US Supreme Court handed down a series of significant decisions in patent, copyright, and trademark cases in the last several weeks of May and June.” They also highlight Vidal v. Elster, a pending Supreme Court case that will ask “the court to consider the interplay between the First Amendment and trademark law.”