<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jonathan Pink&#039;s Way Too Intelligent Intellectual Property Report</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com</link>
	<description>Snarky Analysis of Intellectual Property Matters for Those Who Have Too Much Time on Their Hands</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:01:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Copyright Protection in Yoga Exercises? Not Likely</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-protection-in-yoga-exercises-not-likely</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-protection-in-yoga-exercises-not-likely#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-protection-in-yoga-exercises-not-likely</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I remember when I first heard of Bikram Yoga, the rigidly prescribed sequence of twenty-six postures set to a balmy 105 degrees and 40% humidity:
It was New Year&#8217;s day some years ago and we were walking with friends &#8212; and kids in strollers &#8212; around Balboa Island in Newport Beach. A woman in our group [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-protection-in-yoga-exercises-not-likely/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Copyright Infringement on the Campaign Trail</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-infringement-on-the-campaign-trail</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-infringement-on-the-campaign-trail#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-infringement-on-the-campaign-trail</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s not just the “very poor” who are ticked off at Mitt Romney these days. NBC has got a beef with him as well.
Mitt’s got a TV ad out in which he uses a clip from NBC’s Nightly News, circa 1997. The clip shows Tom Brokaw reporting that Newt Gingrich was found guilty of various [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/copyright-infringement-on-the-campaign-trail/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When is a Book Not a Book?</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/when-is-a-book-not-a-book</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/when-is-a-book-not-a-book#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/when-is-a-book-not-a-book</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting new dispute brewing . . . and this on the heels of the CCIA report (see post of 1/30/2012) no less.
The CCIA report talks about the general health of the global entertainment industry. In a nutshell, it says that revenue generated from, and the production of, movies, books and music is far greater than prior [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/when-is-a-book-not-a-book/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Sky . . . Isn’t Falling?</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-sky-isn%e2%80%99t-falling</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-sky-isn%e2%80%99t-falling#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-sky-isn%e2%80%99t-falling</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well this is interesting, even if some may not want to hear it.
The Computer &#38; Communications Industry Association released a study today entitled “The Sky is Rising,” in which it states that, economically speaking, the entertainment industry grew by 50 percent over the past decade and that consumer spending on entertainment also increased.
I for one [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-sky-isn%e2%80%99t-falling/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Artist Known as Prince . . . Richard Prince</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-artist-known-as-prince-richard-prince</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-artist-known-as-prince-richard-prince#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-artist-known-as-prince-richard-prince</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Richard Prince is an artist. At least according to some people. Others have less flattering terms for what he does.
Prince is principally a painter and a photographer. He may be best known for his technique of “appropriating” photographs which he then “rephotographs” to create his works.
One example of this is his work involving photographs from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/the-artist-known-as-prince-richard-prince/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Batmobile Lawsuit Hits Car Marker &#8211; Kapow!</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/batmobile-lawsuit-hits-car-marker-kapow</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/batmobile-lawsuit-hits-car-marker-kapow#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/batmobile-lawsuit-hits-car-marker-kapow</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Haven’t written in a while despite some really important rulings on, e.g. finding of personal jurisdiction based on social network activity, but the following has something that even those weighty and intellectually stimulating topics don’t have:  Batman.
Cue Batman music.  Ok, it was annoying enough then, kill the music (insert sound of needle scraping [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/batmobile-lawsuit-hits-car-marker-kapow/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>36th Annual Intellectual Property Institute</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/36th-annual-intellectual-property-institute</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/36th-annual-intellectual-property-institute#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/36th-annual-intellectual-property-institute</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ok, I usually don&#8217;t shill for anybody, but this is a worthy event and, if you&#8217;re wasting time reading my blog (and yes, George, I know you are), then you might as well know about a really good source of IP information. Namely, the 36th Annual Intellectual Property Institute.
This year the festivities will be held [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/36th-annual-intellectual-property-institute/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More, Yes More, On Rule 68</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/more-yes-more-on-rule-68</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/more-yes-more-on-rule-68#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 21:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Rule of Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rule 68]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/more-yes-more-on-rule-68</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For no good reason, I&#8217;m adding still more information for you on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 68.  Why?  What, you&#8217;ve got something better to read?  The New Yorker perhaps.  Relax this will only take a minute.  Besides, I mention it because it recently came up (again), and it&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/more-yes-more-on-rule-68/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trademarks and the Internet &#8212; In Search of the Senior User</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/trademarks-and-the-internet-in-search-of-the-senior-user</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/trademarks-and-the-internet-in-search-of-the-senior-user#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 05:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/trademarks-and-the-internet-in-search-of-the-senior-user</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does the use of a common law trademake on the Internet convey senior territorial rights to the mark holder throughout the U.S.?   
No. Although the Internet is global in scope, the use of a trademark on a website that can theoretically be accessed anywhere in the U.S. (and indeed the rest of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/trademarks-and-the-internet-in-search-of-the-senior-user/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>122</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Turns Out I was Wrong &#8212; Attorneys Fees and Rule 68</title>
		<link>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/turns-out-i-was-wrong-attorneys-fees-and-rule-68</link>
		<comments>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/turns-out-i-was-wrong-attorneys-fees-and-rule-68#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 21:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorneys Fees and Rule 68]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/turns-out-i-was-wrong-attorneys-fees-and-rule-68</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After all this time . . . I had thought that FRCP Rule 68 was an excellent tool to hammer the plaintiff, even where the copyright defendant had in fact copied.  This is because an argument exists that the recoverable &#8220;costs&#8221; under Rule 68 include attorneys fees.  Thus, by making a Rule 68 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jonathanpinkesq.com/turns-out-i-was-wrong-attorneys-fees-and-rule-68/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

