WCL Glushko-Samuelson IP Clinic

On February 21st, Washington Area Lawyers for the Arts (WALA) will again partner with the WCL Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Law Clinic and GW Small Business Clinic for their fourth annual “Pop-Up” Legal Clinic. This amazing opportunity for Washington’s creative community provides artists and entrepreneurs to receive free legal consultation in intellectual property and business development.

Assisted by WCL and GW professors, the IP Law Clinic students will assist in copyright, patent, trademark and related intellectual property fields, while Small Business Clinic students will provide corporate assistance for start-ups. This collaboration creates a valuable learning opportunity for both students and artists.

The Clinic will be held from 5-7 PM at the offices of the GW Law School’s Small Business & Community Economic Development Clinic at 2000 G Street NW, Washington, DC.

For more information:    http://waladc.org

Through the USPTO Law School Clinic Certification Program, more than 2,700 law school clinic students have been able to practice patent and/or trademark law before the USPTO under the guidance of a Faculty Clinic Supervisor. Not only has this provided superior legal training and invaluable experience to these students, but by providing their IP services to the public pro bono, this has also increased access to legal representation for the public.

The program came about as a result of a 2006 request for student practice in the agency by faculty of the American University Glushko-Samuelson IP Law Clinic.  The AU faculty suggested the creation of a student practice rule in the agency modeled on the many student practice rules in state and federal courts across the country. The clinic’s students were appearing in federal court under such rules in IP matters, but were unable to participate in IP rights acquisition at the USPTO on their own.

By expanding education about patents, trademarks, and the patents and trademarks system at the law school level, independent inventors and entrepreneurs that have otherwise not been able to obtain quality legal services, have been afforded access to the competent legal representation necessary to succeed and compete in today’s economy.

This first annual report fulfills the requirements of the Law School Clinic Certification Program Act (P.L. 113-227) by describing the number of law schools and law students participating in the Law School Clinic Certification Program, the work done through the Program, the benefits of the Program, and any recommendations for modifications to the Program. A copy of the Report to Congress is available here.

On November 17^th over 50 IP Clinic alums (representing the classes of 2002-2016) and all the former clinic faculty returned to campus to hear clinic founder Professor Peter Jaszi deliver the annual Distinguished Lecture on Intellectual Property.  Peter’s lecture was “Cultural practice and copyright justice: Confessions of a semi-reconstructed auteurist”   

At the celebratory reception clinic alums, faculty and current clinic students had the chance to mingle and toast the man who started it all!

by Kendal Hardison and Rachael Stelly

The Federal Communications Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on February 18, 2016 seeking comment on their proposed rules to unlock the set-top box.

The Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Law Clinic, on behalf of the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), filed comments in the FCC’s proceeding. Our comments support the FCC’s proposed rules and argues that the rules are in the interest of all consumers. Dr. Mark Cooper, Research Director at the CFA, provided economic analysis of the cable market supporting the need for increased innovation and wrote a report to attach with the comments which describes the abuse of market power by cable providers.

The following can be attributed to Dr. Cooper:

“Cable company abuse of market power in the set-top box market has probably cost consumers over $100 billion in the past two decades, but the pocketbook impact is only part of the story. This is the most egregious example of the failure of federal policy to deliver the competition promised by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, precisely because similar markets that were competitive—like cell phones, computers and TV sets—delivered so much higher quality at a fraction of the cost.”

The cable market is in dire need of competition and unlocking the set-top box will promote innovation in the multichannel video programming distribution (“MVPD”) market. The digital programming market has innovated at a rapid pace over recent years, offering consumers a wide range of new products and services.  In contrast, the set-top box market and the MVPD market, of which it is a part, has been comparatively stagnant.

The set-top box is a key barrier to the delivery of MVPD services and plays a role in perpetuating cable market power to the detriment of consumers.  Without the incentives inherent in a competitive marketplace, the cable industry has had little reason to listen to user needs and adapt accordingly.  Unlocking the set-top box market finally places the consumers in a more advantageous position when dealing with the cable industry.

Currently, consumers are paying $231 annually to rent a set-top box by their cable provider. This is on top of cable subscription fees. The proposed rules will open up the market for the set-top box and allow third-party manufacturers to enter the set-top box market.

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is set to hear Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. Aereokiller, the latest case in the Internet retransmission service’s saga to obtain 17 U.S.C. § 111 compulsory licensing under the Copyright Act, which gives access to broadcast television programming at regulated rates. The Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Law Clinic, on behalf of the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), filed an amicus brief in support of Aereokiller (now known as FilmOn) because American consumers are tired of over-paying for cable television. Download it here (PDF):

Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. Aereo Killer, Case No. 15-56420 CFA

Another team of student attorneys filed a second brief on behalf of the National Federation of the Blind highlighting the importance of online access to television programming in accessible formats. Download the NFB’s brief here:

Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. Aereo Killer, Case No. 15-56420 NFB

More information about the case and the CFA brief after the jump! More info about the NFB brief will come in a future blog post.

Continue reading →