INFO 237 Fall 2009 Syllabus

University of California at Berkeley, Fall 2009
INFO 237
Intellectual Property Law for the Information Industries
Thursdays, 3:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. (3 units)
202 South Hall

Instructor: Brian W. Carver (bcarver at ischool dot berkeley dot edu)
207C South Hall
510.643.1469
Office Hours: Thursdays 1:30-3:30 and by appointment

Course Websites:

• http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~bcarver/ (main site)
• https://bspace.berkeley.edu (slides, exams, handouts)

Grade and Attendance:
24-hour take-home mid-term exam (30%)
24-hour take-home final exam (30%)
Wikipedia Project # 1 (10%)
Wikipedia Project # 2 (10%)
Brian's Wiki Project (10%)
Class participation (10%)

The exams will be designed to be completed in three hours, but you will be permitted 24-hours in which to take them. The exams will be open book and open notes. In fact, you may use any available resource in writing the exams except for another person.

Class participation will consist of being on-call for class discussion and making substantive contributions to the class discussions.

Attendance is expected. If you need to miss all or a portion of a class, I will assume you have a good reason, so you need not detail it for me. If you like, you can simply send me an email letting me know you need to miss, but it is not necessary.

Textbook: Lemley, Menell, Merges, & Samuelson, Software and Internet Law ("SAIL") (3d ed. 2006); additional readings available online. (This textbook is also used for INFO 235 Cyberlaw, to be offered Spring 2010).

Prerequisites: None; Students from all levels (graduate/undergraduate) and schools on campus are welcome. However, this is a graduate-level course, so interested undergraduates are encouraged to meet with me before enrolling (or before the drop deadline).

Course Description (from the Course Catalog): This course will provide an overview of the intellectual property laws with which information managers need to be familiar. It will start with a consideration of trade secrecy law that information technology and other firms routinely use to protect commercially valuable information. It will then consider the role that copyright law plays in the legal protection of information products and services. Although patents for many years rarely were available to protect information innovations, patents on such innovations are becoming increasingly common. As a consequence, it is necessary to consider standards of patentability and the scope of protection that patent affords to innovators. Trademark law allows firms to protect words or symbols used to identify their goods or services and to distinguish them from the goods and services of other producers. It offers significant protection to producers of information products and services. Because so many firms license intellectual property rights, some coverage of licensing issues is also important. Much of the course will concern the legal protection of computer software and databases, but it will also explore some intellectual property issues arising in cyberspace.

Course Goals: We will survey trade secret, copyright, trademark, and patent law. Students will, for the most part, be introduced to these topics through reading of judicial opinions, in-class lectures, and discussions. Students will illustrate their understanding of the material through discussions, writing assignments, and the mid-term and final exams.

Add/Drop Policy: The university has determined that the last day to drop without a "W" is September ##.

Academic Honesty: U.C. Berkeley's Code of Student Conduct prohibits all forms of academic misconduct including but not limited to cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, or facilitating academic dishonesty. See Policy 102.01 at http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/aos/uc100.html and http://students.berkeley.edu/uga/conductiii-vii.asp#V It is my policy to pursue the discipline of such misconduct, including, but not limited to, the entering of a grade of F in the course and a notation (or equivalent) on the student's transcript of the reason for same.

Resources: http://dictionary.law.com/ Judges and professors use a lot of legal jargon. Here's a way to look it up.

Students with disabilities: Students with disabilities who may need accommodations for any sort of disability are invited to make an appointment to see me.

Special Thanks: to those who previously taught this course, Jason Schultz, Aaron Perzanowski, Fred von Lohmann, and Pamela Samuelson, upon whose work this syllabus is based.

---

SCHEDULE:

August 27

• Intro to Trade Secrets, Copyright, Patents, & Trademark Law, statutory and/or constitutional bases for same;
• Administrative matters (exams, participation, reading court opinions, U.S. courts);
• Explanation of Wikipedia Projects and Brian's Wiki project.

---

September 3

(A - L on call)

• Orin S. Kerr, How to Read a Legal Opinion
• Trade Secrets: elements, misappropriation, reverse engineering SAIL 3-6.
  • Rivendell Forest Products v. Georgia Pac. Corp., 824 F. Supp. 961 (D. Colo. 1993). SAIL 6-10.
  • Rivendell Forest Products v. Georgia Pac. Corp., 28 F.3d 1042 (10th Cir. 1994). SAIL 11-13.
  • Data General Corp. v. Digital Computer Controls, Inc., 297 A.2d 433 (Del. Ch. 1971). SAIL 14-19.
  • Comprehensive Techs. Int'l, Inc. v. Software Artisans, Inc., 3 F.3d 730 (4th Cir. 1993). SAIL 20-31.
  • Asset Mktg Sys. v. Gagnon, 542 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2008).
• Trade Secrets: "inevitable disclosure" and non-compete agreements
  • Gene Johnson, Judge rules former Microsoft executive Lee can recruit for Google, The Seattle Times (Sep. 13, 2005).
  • Microsoft Corp. v. Lee, No. 05-2-23561-6 SEA (Wash. Sup. Ct. Sep. 13, 2005).
  • IBM v. Papermaster, No. 08-9078, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95516 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2008).

---

September 10

(M-Z on call)

• Copyright Overview: intro, scope, exclusive rights, remedies
  • 17 U.S.C. §§ 102 & 106.
• Copyright Protection for Code: copying of literal and nonliteral elements of code, abstraction-filtration-comparison, copying of functional elements, protocols, screen displays, and user interfaces SAIL 33-40.
  • Computer Assocs. Int'l v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992). SAIL 40-58.
  • Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, 49 F.3d 807 (1st Cir. 1995). SAIL 58-81.
  • Data East USA, Inc. v. Epyx, Inc., 862 F.2d 204 (9th Cir. 1988). SAIL 81-85.
  • Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 35 F.3d 1435 (9th Cir. 1994). SAIL 85-93.

---

September 17

(A - L on call)

• Ownership of Copies: First Sale and Section 117
  • 17 U.S.C. §§ 109, 117. SAIL 93-106.
  • MAI Sys. Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511 (9th Cir. 1993) (Read ONLY paragraphs 54-71).
  • Microsoft Corp. v. Harmony Computers & Elecs., Inc., 846 F. Supp. 208 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). SAIL 301-304.
  • Microsoft Corp. v. DAK Indus., Inc., 66 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. 1995) (Read ONLY paragraphs 1-13 & 25-31).
  • Softman Products Co. v. Adobe Sys., Inc., 171 F. Supp. 2d 1075 (C.D. Cal. 2001). SAIL 304-315.
  • Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., 555 F.Supp.2d 1164 (W.D.Wash. 2008).
  • MDY Indus. LLC v. Blizzard Entm't, Inc., No. 06-2555, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53988, 2008 WL 2757357 (D. Ariz. Jul. 14, 2008).

---

September 24

(M-Z on call)

• Wikipedia Project #1 DUE Monday, Sep. 28.
• Derivative Works
  • 17 U.S.C. § 103.
  • Midway Mfg. Co. v. Artic Int'l, Inc., 704 F.2d 1009 (7th Cir. 1983). SAIL 106-112.
• Fair Use
  • 17 U.S.C. § 107.
  • Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of Am., Inc., 964 F.2d 965 (9th Cir. 1992). SAIL 113-118.
  • Micro Star v. Formgen Inc., 154 F.3d 1107 (9th Cir. 1998). SAIL 118-125.
• Using information location tools as fair use
  • Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 336 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2003). SAIL 721-732.
  • Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007).
• Google Books Settlement
  • Eric Schmidt, Books of Revelation, The Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2005.
  • Pamela Samuelson, Legally Speaking: The Dead Souls of the Google Booksearch Settlement, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 52 (Jul. 2009).

---

October 1

(A - L on call)

• Contract Formation: Shrinkwrap, Clickwrap, and Browsewrap licenses
  • Step-Saver Data Sys. v. Wyse Tech., 939 F.2d 91 (3d Cir. 1991). SAIL 324-332.
  • ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996). SAIL 332-340.
  • Specht v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 306 F.3d 17 (2d Cir. 2002). SAIL 341-350.
• Reverse Engineering
  • Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software Ltd., 847 F.2d 255 (5th Cir. 1988).
  • Sega Enters. Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) (Read copyright portion only). SAIL 125-142.
  • Bowers v. Baystate Techs., Inc., 320 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2003). (Read ONLY paragraphs 1-33 & 62-77).
• Copyright Misuse
  • Lasercomb Am., Inc. v. Reynolds, 911 F.2d 970 (4th Cir. 1990). SAIL 142-150.

---

October 8

(M-Z on call)

• Copyright Liability for Intermediaries: Internet Service and Access Providers
  • Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Netcom On-Line Commc'n Servs., Inc., 907 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995). SAIL 732-742.
  • Costar Group, Inc. v. Loopnet, Inc., 373 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2004).
  • Cartoon Network, LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc., 536 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2008).
• Contributory and Vicarious Liability for Copyright Infringement
  • A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001). SAIL 743-759.
  • Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005). (Read Only Sections I, II.A and III.A&B of the Grokster majority opinion). SAIL 759-773.

---

October 15

(A - L on call)

• Paracopyright: DMCA Section 1201
  • 17 U.S.C. § 1201. SAIL 141-142; 782-783.
  • Pamela Samuelson, Intellectual Property and the Digital Economy: Why the Anti-Circumvention Regulations Need to be Revised, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 519 (1999). SAIL 784-788.
• Paracopyright: DMCA Applications
  • Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). SAIL 788-808.
  • Lexmark Int'l Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 387 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2004). SAIL 808-821.
  • Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Skylink Techs., Inc., 381 F.3d 1178 (Fed. Cir. 2004). (Read ONLY paragraphs 1-36 & 49-end).
• DMCA Safe Harbors
  • 17 U.S.C. § 512
  • Holden Lenz's "Let's Go Crazy" #1 (Direct video link)
  • Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., No. C07-3783 JF, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66335 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2008).
  • IO Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc., No. C06-03926 HRL, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65915 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 2008).
  • (Optional) Brian W. Carver, A Billion Dollar Test of the DMCA Safe Harbors, Cyberlaw Cases (Aug. 31, 2009).

---

October 15-16 MID TERM EXAM

• 24-Hour Take-Home Exam
  • Available October 15, 6:30 P.M., DUE October 16, 6:30 P.M.
  • Covers material from August 27 - October 8, inclusive.

---

October 22

(M-Z on call)

• Free Software Licensing
  • Brian W. Carver, Share and Share Alike: Understanding and Enforcing Open Source and Free Software Licenses, 20 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 443 (2005). SAIL 371-79.
  • The Artistic License
  • Jacobsen v. Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
  • Brett Smith, A Quick Guide to GPLv3
• Creative Commons Licensing
  • Creative Commons, Get Creative video
  • Creative Commons, Wanna Work Together? video
  • "View the Legal Code" for some of the licenses at http://creativecommons.org/about/license/

---

October 29

(A - L on call)

• Trademark Law: Domain Names and Cybersquatting SAIL 631-633.
  • Panavision Int'l, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998). SAIL 633-640.
  • Planned Parenthood Fed'n of Am., Inc. v. Bucci, 42 U.S.P.Q.2d 1430 (S.D.N.Y. 1997). SAIL 640-652.
  • People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001). SAIL 652-657.
  • Sega Enters. Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) (Read trademark portion only). SAIL 248-253.
• Trademark Law: Metatags
  • Brookfield Commc'ns, Inc. v. West Coast Ent'mt Corp., 174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999). SAIL 677-685.
  • Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Welles, 279 F.3d 796 (9th Cir. 2002). SAIL 685-692.
  • Bosley Med. Inst. v. Kremer, 403 F.3d 672 (9th Cir. 2005).

---

November 5

(M-Z on call)

• Trademark Law: Pop-up and keyword advertising, gripe sites
  • 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. WhenU.com, Inc., 414 F.3d 400 (2d Cir. 2005). SAIL 692-701.
  • Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Netscape Commc'ns Corp., 354 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2004). SAIL 702-711.
  • Lamparello v. Falwell, 420 F.3d 309 (4th Cir. 2005). SAIL 711-721.
  • Google, Inc. v. Am. Blind & Wallpaper Factory, (N.D. Cal., Apr. 18, 2007).
  • Rescuecom Corp. v. Google, Inc., 562 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2009).
• The Uniform Dispute Resolution Process (UDRP) and the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) SAIL 669-676.
  • 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d)
  • browse http://www.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp.htm
  • Shields v. Zuccarini, 254 F.3d 476 (3d Cir. 2001). SAIL 657-663.
  • People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001). SAIL 663-669.

---

November 12

(A - L on call)

• Patent Law: Is software patentable subject matter? and software as a "Method of Doing Business" SAIL 151-160.
  • 35 U.S.C. §§ 100-104
  • U.S. Patent No. 5,111,391
  • U.S. Patent No. 5,443,036
  • State Street Bank & Trust v. Signature Fin. Servs., 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998). SAIL 160-165; 173-180.
  • AT&T Corp. v. Excel Commc'ns, Inc., 172 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 1999). SAIL 165-173.
• Patent Law: Examination and Validity of Software Patents - Novelty and Nonobviousness
  • Netscape Commc'ns Corp. v. Konrad, 295 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2002). SAIL 180-187.
  • Lockwood v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 107 F.3d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1997). SAIL 187-190.
  • British Telecomms. Plc. v. Prodigy, 217 F. Supp. 2d 399 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). SAIL 841-848.

---

November 19

(M-Z on call)

• Wikipedia Project #2 DUE.
• Patent Exhaustion
  • Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 128 S. Ct. 2109 (2008).
• In re Bilksi
  • In Re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc majority opinion and Mayer dissent).
  • Pamela Samuelson and Jason Schultz, Brief of Entrepreneurial and Consumer Advocates Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in Bilski v. Kappos.
  • Mark Lemley, Michael Risch, Ted Sichelman, and R. Polk Wagner, Brief Amici Curiae of 20 Law and Business Professors in Support of Neither Party in Bilski v. Kappos.
  • Bilski v. Kappos, Supreme Court Oral Argument Transcript (Nov. 9, 2009).

---

---

December 3

• Review and Exam Prep

---

December 12-13 FINAL EXAM

• 24-Hour Take-Home exam
  • Available December 12, 9:00 A.M.; DUE December 13, 9:00 A.M.
  • Covers material from October 15 - December 3.

---