Originally Posted by gideongallery

this case is interesting because it attempts to use copyright/patent law to invaidate reverse engineering that why it crossed my desk.


the complaint in the case include an arguement about copyright infringement

it includes a patent claim

it include a trademark claim

it includes and unfair business practise claim

the "news" site that latched on to the copyright infringement part of that complaint.

the copyright part is not going to hold water it bogus, but that doesn't stop the lawyers from putting it in the complaint, and until a judge rules it will be part of the case.

the patent is iffy (again trying to disqualify reverse engineering)


the trademark and unfair business practise claim is the one with teeth

but the point i was making was idiots like blackmonster/robbie who get their law "news" from press release based new reporting sites

wouldn't realize that only valid part of the case would be the trademark and unfair business practice part. so they used it as proof that copyright law apply to physical goods (totally wrong btw).


the case is a squeeze play

to get out from the patent/copyright infringement part mongoose will have to prove that the reverse engineering generated the design specs

if they point out the differences to justify the position (normal process in such a case)

those differences will be used as proof of trademark/UFB (your diluting the brand by using an inferior version and representing it as a replica of our brand)

it very cool case legally