The title of that article is misleading. This is not a copyright case. This is not a patent case. This was brought before the Federal courts under 15 U.S. Code §1051-1052 making it a trademark case. All three, though forms of intellectual property, are very different matters.
[quote=“Coquet-Shack, post:3, topic:1189, full:true”]
Wait a momnet @AJ113 . Were you saying the other day that you couldn’t copyright a physical thing, like that diamond.I’m thoroughly confused. [/quote] AJ was correct in that you can not copyright a physical thing. The difference between a diamond and a physical CD disk is that the physical CD disk contains a ‘performance’ which is copyrightable. Since the ‘musical composition’ exists independently from the ‘performance’ on which the composition was based, a recorded CD disk is NOT a purely physical thing. A diamond does not have that dichotomy of intellectual property attributes. Now if you wanted to copyright a blank physical CD disk? (haha - Then sue everyone who tried to burn data onto it?) No. You could not.
It is also false to assume that all physical objects receive patents. Lines and scripts of computer code receive patent. Not copyright. And patents in this case are far more valuable than copyright because they protect a much broader range of application.
No. Under US law he would challenge the status of your ‘provisional patent’, and block the patent from ever being granted in the first place. Your physical product (whatever it is), will likely be ineligible to receive ‘copyright’ protection, as it must fall within the scope of copyright (as defined in 17 US Code Chapter 1 § 500-501).
Great question but it doesn’t apply to this case, as this is a trademark case. Not a patent case. In trademark law, IT IS NOT the first party that registers the trademark to whom the rights to that trademark belong. It is the first party that operatively USES the trademark. And as expected, in the preliminary motion, Fender cited “First use in commerce” from 1954. But in this case, first use clauses were over-ridden by other factors.
Anyone can sue for anything…the question is if the case has any merit. The owner in this case (Fender) did NOT have a patent, and they sued anyway. Fenders claim was both legitimate and actionable, they simply failed to defend it.