Today virtually every company, regardless of size, is a “tech” company; nearly every business has some connection to the Internet, and indeed today most have websites.  Social media platforms have become a critical component of online marketing strategies for companies big and small.  Considering the use of logos, images, business names, symbols, copyrights, trademarks, and all that is necessary for businesses to compete today, is cyber liability insurance really necessary?  The short answer – yes.

Think about it for just a moment:  Even companies who do not actually conduct business online, such as perhaps an auto collision repair shop, still use the Internet to interact with insurance providers via web portals.  In a tech-savvy world, much can happen and does on a daily basis.  Defamation, copyright or trademark infringement, data breach, the risks are increasing for not only large corporations, but small companies as well.

Cyber crime is one of the biggest threats today for companies who conduct any business activity at all online.  Unfortunately, many individuals neglect to realize how vulnerable their businesses are to cyber crime, and fail to take action to reduce exposure.  Employee error can result in cyber crime, so staff must be diligently trained on data transmission.  Companies whose websites or other online systems are “hacked” leave their customers’ personal data (such as name, banking information, credit card numbers, etc.) vulnerable, and often in the hands of criminals.

On the Internet, anything can happen.  Many companies do all possible to ensure their websites and other online properties are secure, however many criminals are extremely intelligent.  Data breach is an extremely serious matter, as are intellectual property infringement, defamation, and employee error.

Is cyber liability insurance a good idea?  Absolutely, considering the growing trend of cyber crimes committed upon businesses of every size.

The Internet presents many challenges for businesses today; at Spotora & Associates, our Los Angeles business attorneys assist with all technology related, from licensing agreements to protecting and defending your intellectual property on the Internet.  As seasoned LA business attorneys, we understand the challenges companies face today in a “virtual” world; let us help you with your needs.

Recently, Cupertino-based Apple Inc. has been hit with a slew of new patent infringement lawsuits after the company was ordered last week to pay more than $530 million for infringing on the patents of a Texas company, according to an article at the LA Times.

Texas-based Smartflash was awarded $532.9 million by a jury, then filed an additional lawsuit on February 25 alleging that Apple violated the company’s patents in relation to devices that debuted after the original lawsuit was already in court. In the midst of all this, Ericsson, a pioneer in the Swedish mobile phone industry, hit Apple hard when the company filed seven federal lawsuits against Apple in an ongoing patent dispute, along with two complaints filed with the U.S. International Trade commission alleging that Apple had infringed on more than 40 patents in relation to various technologies relevant to iPads and iPhones.

In January of this year, a licensing agreement between Apple and Ericsson regarding royalties to be paid to the Swedish technology company for its mobile technology expired. Since that time, the companies have traded lawsuits, with Apple filing a suit against Ericsson in January regarding a fair rate for the rights to Ericsson’s patents. A spokeswoman for Apple revealed a statement made by Apple saying, “We’ve always been willing to pay a fair price to secure the rights to standards essential patents covering technology in our products. Unfortunately, we have not been able to agree with Ericsson on a fair rate for their patents so, as a last resort, we are asking the courts for help.”

Some of the patents Ericsson is taking legal action against Apple for include 2G, 3G, and 4G/LTE high-speed wireless technology; complaints filed in federal court also indicate Ericsson has taken legal action in regards to GPS technology.

While the initial lawsuit filed by Smartflash against Apple claimed infringement on three patents including devices that use iTunes and iTunes software, the new lawsuit filed by Smartflash LLC accused Apple of continuing to infringe on patents such as those for payment for songs, games, and other data in addition to methods utilized to manage digital rights. Apple denies the allegations, saying that the company manufactures no products, has no presence in the U.S., creates no jobs, and has no employees, and that Smartflash is exploiting Apple’s patent system in order to claim royalties for technology that Apple actually invented.

Spotora & Associates is a skilled team of Los Angeles intellectual property attorneys highly experienced and knowledgeable in the areas of patents, trademarks, copyright, trade secrets, and other areas of Internet law. Contact us today for unsurpassed legal guidance, support, and representation in matters regarding intangible rights.

Intellectual property is a complicated aspect of law, to be sure. It encompasses, among other things, copyrights and trademarks, and is intended to protect a variety of “creations of the brain.”

Copyright does not protect ideas, rather, but original literary and artistic works, musical pieces, discoveries, inventions, logos, designs, architectural creations, photographs and the like. The term “intellectual property” wasn’t used until the 1800s, though the foundation for the legal protection of intellectual property began centuries ago.

Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the copyright holder the right to the reproduction of his or her work, to distribute copies or recordings for sale to the public, to perform or display the work publicly and to take other similar actions. The law also details “fair use,” which allows the use of copyrighted material for news reporting, criticism and other special cases.

Intellectual property also includes trademarks. Trademarks are protected by a sign or other indicator that can help distinguish one service-provider or goods manufacturer from another. The sign or indicator can include one or more of the following: a logo, a word or phrase and images. They are protected by the Trademark Act of 1946.

A trademark is essential because it serves to identify a particular business as the source of the service or goods. Registration of a trademark provides federal protection and a bundle of rights; however, use alone can establish common law rights. Those who infringe upon these rights can be subject to penalties.

Trademarks are registered in most countries and are also classified by the International (Nice) Classification of Goods and Services into 45 Trademark Classes. Numbers 1 to 34 concern goods, while numbers 35 to 45 concern services. For a trademark to be registered, it has to be original and cannot be deceptive or similar to trademarks that have already been registered.

Copyrights and trademarks are an essential part of many businesses. And in today’s world, when the rights of creators are being threatened by so many advances in technology, it is important to protect your creations.

If you are looking to file copyright or trademark papers, or believe that someone else has stolen your work or trademark, it is essential that you hire an experienced attorney.

To learn more, visit https://www.spotoralaw.com/

Does the buying of keyword advertising trigger trademark infringement lawsuits?

The short answer is “yes, it can.” But while there have been many instances of such matters being aired in court, judges across the country have struggled to keep current with the matter and have issued less than uniform guidance. To understand the keyword advertising dilemma, it is important to first understand what keyword advertising is.

Keyword advertising, a multibillion-dollar business, refers to paid advertising on the Internet that links specific keywords or groups of keywords. If you have ever used the Internet search engine Google, you know that typing a phrase such as “sporting goods” into the search area would produce advertising links for sporting goods providers on the side of the screen.

Companies pay for the right to certain words so that customers click on the advertisements that lead to their Web sites. Often, companies pay for each “click-through” that is generated. But the controversy with this type of advertising occurs when companies buy a keyword that is part of a competitor’s trademark, bringing into play the Lanham Act.

In part, the Lanham Act is meant to protect the holder against those who “without the consent of the registrant, use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.”

To establish that keyword advertising violates the Lanham Act, it has to be proven that the trademark was actually used and that the general public would be confused about who is offering the goods or services in question.

Second Circuit courts have often found that the use of a keyword on its own is not a violation of the Lanham Act. Yet outside the Second Circuit, courts have often found the opposite to be true.

For example, in April 2008, the Eleventh Circuit ruled against a company who used a competitor’s trademarks within its invisible meta tags of its website. The court ruled that such practices were in fact trademark infringement.

Microsoft, Google and Yahoo! all sell keyword advertising and have been dragged into some Lanham Act court cases.

When it comes to companies protecting themselves against competitors misusing keyword advertising, it is important to track how your trademarks are being used on the Web. When a violation is suspected to have taken place, one should complain to a search engine, many of who often have their own complaint procedures in place. Experts also recommend that companies make sure they are the highest bidder for their advertising keywords that represent their trademarks to prevent others from using them.

To learn more, visit https://spotoralaw.com/.

Your business has a great name, logo and slogan to stimulate brand recognition. Are those creations copyrightable?

One of the most common questions an intellectual lawyer gets asked relates to copyrighting a brand name, title or a logo. Is it possible to copyright those creations? The short answer is no, and in fact, brand names, short phrases, business names and slogans are explicitly excluded from protection; something that usually comes as a significant disappointment to businesses hoping to protect their identities.

The exclusion is actually quite wide and is applicable to any kind of a title, short ad expression, catch-phrase or name. Let’s say your forte was collecting and writing about recipes the great chefs of the world made famous. There are a lot of people who would copy those recipes and give them a whirl. Isn’t that a copyright violation? In the instance of labels, formulas, recipes and ingredient lists, the answer is they are not protected by copyright. However, the text with the directions, explanations and other descriptions may be eligible for copyright. Tread cautiously.

What about a person who wants to use a name in business/commerce? This is different. Business names, brand names and even slogans may be protected. Trademark law says those things are protected if and when they are used in commerce to make a product stand out from someone else’s. Just to throw a spanner into the works, trademark law also says you have exclusive rights to a trademark if you are the first user (under certain conditions). You would need to speak to an intellectual property lawyer about this to find out how it may apply to your circumstances.

In general, there is some trademark protection available automatically if you use your marks in commerce/business. But you still need to register a trademark federally in order to be covered nationwide.

Just to backtrack a bit, that bestselling cookbook about the world’s greatest chefs has recipes and formulas in it, and they aren’t protected by copyright or trademark law. If you want to protect them, you either have to consider that they are trade secrets, or patent them. To that end, you can only patent a recipe or formula if it is new and not just a combo of things already in existence. Drug makers pull that kind of stunt all the time by combining two existing drugs into one and calling it a new drug.

What about the recipe for Pepsi or Dr. Pepper? While these two drinks are recipes, their origin is a formula and is therefore a trade secret. That means they’re protected indefinitely just so long as no one exposes them. A patent would grant up to 20 years protection. If you don’t know if your product or other good may be copyrightable or qualify for a patent, ask an intellectual property attorney. Finding out now saves potential litigation grief later.

Anthony Spotora is a Los Angeles business attorney, intellectual property and entertainment lawyer.  To learn more, visit Spotoralaw.com.

The protection of intellectual property is a basic tenet in the U.S. legal system. The courts have long recognized that the creators of material eligible for copyright protection invest a great deal of time, effort and money to generate these ideas of the mind. They have a right to protect the commercial value of these ideas from theft or abuse by others.

A copyright can apply to artistic works, literary works, inventions, names, slogans, images, symbols, and designs that are, or are intended to be, used in commerce.

Intellectual property works generate public discourse by their very nature. People like to talk about newspaper articles, books, magazines, directories, movies, video games, and other commercial products that are covered by copyright laws.  The question then becomes, how much of the original work can be used by others without interfering with the legal rights of the copyright holder?

The “fair use” doctrine, contained in Section 107 of the copyright law, answers this question by identifying four factors that can be used in evaluating if a use is considered to be fair:

1.       Whether the usage is for commercial or educational purposes
2.       The nature of the original copyrighted work
3.       The portion of copyrighted material being referenced in relation to the whole
4.       The impact of the use on the value or market potential of the copyrighted material

These fair use guidelines can be difficult to interpret, which is why it is important to speak to a trained copyright attorney about your intended usage. Citing the original work itself is not always sufficient to qualify for protection under fair use laws, and your intellectual property attorney can provide guidance in compliance matters.

Gaining permission from the copyright owner to reference their work is the best approach to protect yourself against charges of copyright violation.