Copyright Office
-
AIPLA Submits Comments to US Copyright Office Regarding Deferred Registration Examination Study
January 24, 2022
On January 24, 2022, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the United States Copyright Office pursuant to the Notice of Inquiry related to the deferred registration examination study. The comments address perceived deficiencies in the current registration regime, benefits and drawbacks to offering a deferred examination option, legal or regulatory framework, filing fees, and more. -
AIPLA Submits Comments to U.S. Copyright Office Pursuant to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Related to CASE Act Regulations
November 10, 2021
On November 10, 2021, AIPLA submitted comments to the U.S. Copyright Office pursuant to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) related to CASE Act regulations. Comments provided included support for requiring claimants to provide contact information in the initial notice form and support for charging filing fees for counterclaims. A staggered fee structure was again suggested, and support was provided for an initial notice in a form that includes information required by the statute and additional basic information. An opt-out mechanism for claimants who receive a counterclaim was not supported, and concern was expressed regarding implementation of a mechanism whereby a respondent who has opted out of a CCB proceeding can change their mind and opt back in.
-
AIPLA Submits Comments on Notification of Inquiry Regarding Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (“CASE”) Act Regulations
April 26, 2021
On April 26, 2021, AIPLA submitted comments to the U.S. Copyright Office on Notification of Inquiry regarding Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (“CASE”) Act Regulations. As a general matter, AIPLA believes that it is important to keep the procedures as straight forward and accessible as possible to ensure this will be a new, simple, and low-cost process to resolve small copyright claims. AIPLA encourages the Copyright Claims Board to publish standardized forms and instructions. Additionally, AIPLA is in favor of providing a Second Notice through the U.S. Postal Service. For ease of delivery, AIPLA is in favor of a Designated Agent directory. Online submission of opt-out notices should be encouraged, but a paper option is also recommended. To strike an appropriate balance of discovery, AIPLA recommends that the CCB require a standardized, initial disclosure of relevant information. -
Comments Submitted Pursuant to Sovereign Immunity Study: Notice and Request for Public Comment, 85 Fed. Reg. 34,252
September 2, 2020
AIPLA's comments in response to the above-referenced U.S. Copyright Office Notice and Request for Public Comment, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Allen v. Cooper, 140 S.Ct. 994 -
Comments to Copyright Office on Registration Modernization
June 1, 2020
AIPLA supports and appreciates the Copyright Office’s efforts to modernize the copyright registration system. -
Recommendations on the Position of Register of Copyrights
March 23, 2020
AIPLA discusses the traits the association views as essential for the position of Register of Copyrights. -
Comments to Copyright Office Pursuant to Notification of Inquiry Regarding Online Publication
March 23, 2020
In AIPLA’s view, issues and confusion regarding “online” publication arise from the statute itself. If such issues are to be resolved, we believe that this is best done by Congress. -
Re: Comments Submitted Pursuant to “Notification of Inquiry,” 83 Fed. Reg. 52336 (Oct. 17, 2018)
October 17, 2018
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to offer comments in response to the United States Copyright Office (the “Office”) Notification of Inquiry, 83 Fed. Reg. 52336, issued October 17, 2018, concerning various proposed efforts to modernize the registration process (NOI). -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Copyright Office Fees," September 21, 2018
September 21, 2018
While AIPLA recognizes the Copyright Office’s right and need to increase its fees periodically—and further recognizes that any proposed fee increase will ordinarily be met with some degree of reluctance by those incurring the increased expense—some of the Office’s proposed fee increases here raise certain questions and concerns for AIPLA members that we would like to bring to your attention. -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to Request for Additional Comments Regarding Section 512 Study
February 21, 2017
Although the mechanisms of Section 512 are used now more than ever, many stakeholders believe the system can be improved substantially, and in a variety of ways that reflect the “great diversity among the categories of content creators and ISPs who comprise the Internet ecosystem.” -
AIPLA Comments on IT Modernization Plan
March 31, 2016
AIPLA supports funding the Copyright Office’s modernization efforts, including the goals reflected in the IT Plan, through a blend of fees for services and dedicated appropriated dollars. -
Comments Submitted Pursuant to Request for Comments Regarding “Mass Digitization Pilot Program,”
October 9, 2015
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (“AIPLA”) is pleased to have the opportunity to present its views on the above-referenced U.S. Copyright Office request for comments regarding “Mass Digitization Pilot Program,” 80 Fed. Reg. 32614 (June 9, 2015). -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to Notice of Inquiry Regarding "Copyright Protection for Certain Visual Works,"
July 23, 2015
AIPLA believes the ease of unauthorized copying online is a major challenge to the licensing of visual works. -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to Notices of Inquiry Entitled “Orphan Works and Mass Digitization; Request for Additional Comments and Announcement of Public Roundtables,”
May 21, 2014
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to submit these comments in response the above-referenced Notices of Inquiry concerning the Office’s ongoing assessment of orphan works and mass digitization. -
AIPLA Comments on Notice of Inquiry Regarding "Technological Upgrades to Registration and Recordation Functions"
May 20, 2013
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to offer the following comments concerning the U.S. Copyright Office Notice of Inquiry regarding “Technological Upgrades to Registration and Recordation Functions” published in the March 22, 2013, issue of the Federal Register, 78 Fed. Reg. 17722. -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to Notice of Inquiry Regarding "Orphan Works and Mass Digitization"
February 4, 2013
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to offer comments in response to the U.S. Copyright Office Notice of Inquiry entitled “Orphan Works and Mass Digitization” (the “NOI”), as published in the October 22, 2012 issue of the Federal Register. 77 Fed. Reg. 64555. -
AIPLA Comments on Remedies for Small Copyright Claims
January 16, 2012
AIPLA applauds efforts by Congress and the Copyright Office to ensure that copyright owners of all kinds–large and small–have the ability to effectively protect their rights in their works. -
AIPLA Comments to DMCA Rulemaking Regarding Exemptions to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies
February 2, 2009
AIPLA agrees that, for certain classes of work, exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's ("DMCA") anti-circumvention provisions are warranted. -
Comments Submitted Pursuant to Notice of Inquiry to Examine Issues Raised by “Orphan Works”
May 8, 2005
AIPLA agrees that difficulties in identifying and locating the owners of copyright in some “orphan works” present a genuine problem, and that society would benefit from greater access to such works.
Recent Advocacy
-
AIPLA Comments on Draft Anti-Monopoly Guidelines in the Field of Standard Essential Patents
August 1, 2023
Arlington, VA. August 1, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to China’s State Administration of Market Regulation on the Draft Anti-monopoly Guidelines in the Field of Standard Essential Patents. -
AIPLA Comments on USPTO’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)
June 27, 2023
Arlington, VA. June 20, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the United States Patent and Trademark Office in response to its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in 88 Fed. Reg. 77, at 24503 (April 21, 2023) (ANPRM) on “Changes Under Consideration to Discretionary Institution Practices, Petition Word-Count Limits, and Settlement Practices for America Invents Act Trial Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.” -
AIPLA Comments on USTPO’s Recent Trademark Fee Setting and Adjusting Proposal to the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC)
June 22, 2023
Arlington, VA. June 12, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments on the USPTO’s (i.e., Office’s) recent Trademark Fee Setting and Adjusting Proposal to the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (“Fee Proposal”).
-
Lee v. TAM, U.S., No. 15-1293, amicus brief filed 11/18/2016.
November 18, 2016
The Lanham Act ban on registering a mark that “may disparage” is unconstitutionally vague under the 5th Amendment and violates the First Amendment as applied to “The Slants” name for a band of Asian musicians, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a November 18, 2016 amicus brief. -
In re Aqua Products, Inc., Fed. Cir., No. 2015-1177, amicus brief filed 10/4/2016
October 4, 2016
The right of a patent owner to amend its patent claims in an inter partes review proceedings is improperly limited by the PTAB requirement that the patent owner bear the burden of persuasion that the amended claims are patentable, AIPLA argued to the en banc Federal Circuit in an amicus brief filed October 4, 2016. -
Life Technologies Corp v. Promega Corp, U.S. No. 14-1538, amicus brief filed 9/8/2016
September 8, 2016
Patent infringement liability under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(1) for supplying a “substantial portion of the components” of the invention may be established by supplying a single component that is crucially important to a multi-component invention, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a brief filed September 8, 2016. -
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple, Inc., U.S., No. 15-777, amicus brief filed 8/4/2016
August 4, 2016
The plain language and legislative history of 35 U.S.C. 289 demonstrates that Congress has provided design patent owners with an infringement remedy of the infringer's profits that is based on the total, unapportioned revenue from sales of the entire article of manufacture, AIPLA argued August 4, 2016, in a Supreme Court amicus brief. -
Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., U.S., No. 15-866, amicus brief filed 7/22/2016
July 22, 2016
Any test of copyrightability for features contained in a utilitarian work must first determine whether the work contains pictorial, graphic or sculptural elements, and if so, whether they can be identified separately from and exist independently of the unprotectable utilitarian features of the work, AIPLA argued July 22, 2016, in a Supreme Court amicus brief. -
SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, U.S., No. 15-927, amicus brief filed 7/22/2016
July 22, 2016
A laches defense may not be raised against a claim for damages based on patent infringement occurring within the six-year limitations period of 35 U.S.C. 286, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a July 22, 2016 amicus brief. -
Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Fed. Cir., No. 16-1284 and -1787, amicus brief filed 5/2/2016
May 22, 2016
The America Invents Act amendment to 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1), adding the list of patent-barring events the phrase “or otherwise available to the public,” imposes a public-availability requirement to the on-sale bar, AIPLA argued to the Federal Circuit in a May 2, 2016 amicus brief. -
AIPLA Comments on IT Modernization Plan
March 31, 2016
AIPLA supports funding the Copyright Office’s modernization efforts, including the goals reflected in the IT Plan, through a blend of fees for services and dedicated appropriated dollars.