The Copyright Office released a rulemaking notice Monday proposing technical amendments to the office’s regulations for registration, recordation, licensing and other services. The amendments mainly codify recent changes to operations, including the office’s reorganization, which included the establishment of a chief information officer and a copyright technology office, the CO said in the Federal Register. The amendments would reflect the CO’s 2014 copyright practices compendium and include updated citations to U.S. copyright law, said the CO notice. The amendments would also propose removing expired and obsolete provisions of CO regulations and generally make the regulations more readable, the office said. Comments are due Nov. 2.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a preliminary injunction request Thursday in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, aimed at blocking the federal government from prosecuting Johns Hopkins University Information Security Institute assistant professor Matthew Green for his planned publication of a book documenting his security research on computer systems. Green’s publication of the book could constitute illegal circumvention of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Section 1201’s ban on circumvention of technological protection measures, EFF said in its filing. EFF requested the preliminary injunction in connection with its July lawsuit against the federal government seeking to end enforcement of Section 1201 (see 1607210015). “Section 1201 imposes strong restrictions on the fair use of copyrighted works, paired with a rigid speech-licensing scheme that offers little real protection for such uses,” EFF said. “Dr. Green’s situation perfectly illustrates how Section 1201 has subverted the traditional contours of copyright, and why it cannot survive constitutional scrutiny.”

The Patent and Trademark Office sought comment Friday on a rulemaking to adjust several patent fees to cover changes in the cost of PTO patent operations, Patent Trial and Appeal Board operations and administrative services. The NPRM follows PTO's study last year of existing patent fees. The office last raised fees in 2013. Proposed fee hikes include rises in costs associated with large entities' utility and design patent applications and those entities' requests for re-examination of a patent application, PTO said in a notice to be published in Monday's Federal Register. PTAB trial fees would also rise, with some fees associated with board trials rising by up to $5,000. The NPRM also would restructure some service fees and expand entities' ability to qualify for a discount, the PTO said. The office said it plans to use the additional revenue to fund PTAB's increased workload, maintain momentum for efforts to decrease PTO's backlog of pending applications and increase the office's reserve balance. Comments are due Dec. 2.

House Judiciary Committee ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich., House IP Subcommittee Vice Chairman Doug Collins, R-Ga., and 16 other House lawmakers jointly urged DOJ Wednesday to drop 100 percent licensing language from its decision on its review of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers and Broadcast Music Inc. consent decrees (see 1608040066). U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton, the BMI rate court judge, struck down the 100 percent licensing language in New York this month as it related to BMI's consent decree. That ruling has likely set the stage for additional legal challenges (see 1609190062). Given Stanton’s ruling, “DOJ can no longer maintain that the language of the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees clearly prohibits fractional licensing,” Collins, Conyers and the other lawmakers said in a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch. “DOJ should take prompt action to limit the confusion and chaos the closing statement creates in the market, and restore certainty to the efficient licensing by ASCAP and BMI of public performing rights.” The other House members who signed the letter were: House IP ranking member Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and Reps. Karen Bass, D-Calif.; Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; Tony Cardenas, D-Calif.; Judy Chu, D-Calif.; David Cicilline, D-R.I.; Steve Cohen, D-Tenn.; Jim Cooper, D-Tenn.; Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.; Joe Crowley, D-N.Y.; Trent Franks, R-Ariz.; Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.; Hank Johnson, D-Ga.; Ted Lieu, D-Calif.; Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; and Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y. DOJ didn't comment.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled against Oracle Tuesday in San Francisco, denying the company’s request for a new trial in its software copyright infringement lawsuit against Google. A jury found in favor of Google in May in a second trial of Oracle’s lawsuit, saying Google’s use of the coding and names contained in Oracle’s Java application programming interface (API) technology in its Android mobile operating system qualifies under the fair use doctrine (see 1605260067). Oracle claimed a new trial is warranted because Google concealed its 2015 ARC++ project to provide Chrome operating system users with Play Android Apps “without developer action.” Alsup disagreed with Oracle, saying Google produced multiple documents on the ARC++ project before the second trial. “Oracle’s failure to review the ARC++ documents is its own fault,” Alsup ruled (in Pacer). The ARC++ documents might not have affected the May jury verdict, Alsup said. “It may well be true that the use of the copyrighted APIs in ARC++ (or any other later use) will not qualify as a fair use, but that will not and does not mean that Google’s argument on transformative use as to the original uses on trial (smartphones and tablets) was improper,” he ruled. “That Oracle failed to detect the ARC++ documents in its possession had no consequence within the defined scope of our trial.” Oracle and Google didn’t comment.

The Copyright Office sought additional comment Tuesday on its study of Digital Millennium Copyright Act Section 1201 provisions on circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs). The CO's study explores whether to adjust the office's triennial review process for granting exemptions to the circumvention ban (see 1512280030). Stakeholders partially focused in initial comments on the inquiry in the study on allowing for presumptive renewal of existing Section 1201 exemptions (see 1603030090). The CO said in the Federal Register​ it wants input on possible legislative recommendations on Section 1201 not directly related to the office's triennial exemptions review process. The office said it “continues to thoroughly evaluate” comments on the triennial review process but the new round of comments “does not specifically address those issues.” Issues up for comment include proposals for new permanent Section 1201 exemptions for mobile device unlocking, assistive technologies for individuals who are blind or vision impaired, some categories of software and “obsolete” technologies. The CO said it wants more input on how the proposed exclusions would affect existing U.S. treaties and trade agreements. The CO said it wants more feedback on possible amendments to existing permanent exemptions for security testing, encryption research and reverse engineering that would address concerns that those exemptions don't adequately cover good-faith research into security flaws and vulnerabilities. The CO said it also wants comment on how the section's anti-trafficking provisions affect third parties' ability to assist in exempted TPM circumventions. Comments are due Oct. 27, replies Nov. 16.

Broadband iTV, Hawaiian Telecom, Oceanic Time Warner Cable and Time Warner Cable are arguing over whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling (in Pacer) earlier this month on McRo v. Bandai Namco Games America is applicable to BBiTV's appeal (see 1604070068) of a U.S. District Court's 2015 ruling on its patent violation litigation. The TWC appellees in a letter (in Pacer) Friday in the Federal Circuit said McRo has no impact on this case and BBiTV's letter "seems to be a pretext" for arguing about the patent containing a technological solution for transferring control of electronic program guide (EPG) from cable operators to content providers, but that argument was never presented in District Court or in BBiTV's briefing. There's nothing in the claims about EPG control transfer, and the patent claims automation only for a process done by hand, TWC said. In its citation of supplemental authority letter (in Pacer) earlier this month, BBiTV said the patent claim isn't centered merely on automation but also provides an inventive process for updating the EPG. The McRo patent fight had to do with automating a 3-D animation method. Charter Communications owns TWC.

Eighty-one IP-intensive industries contributed more than 38 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product in 2014 and supported about 30 percent of all jobs, the Department of Commerce said Monday in a report. The joint Patent and Trademark Office-Economics and Statistics Administration report said IP-intensive industries contribute more than $6 trillion to the U.S. GDP and support at least 45 million U.S. jobs. The report identified IP-intensive industries as those that use copyright, patent and trademark protections most extensively. IP-intensive industries’ proportional contribution to U.S. GDP increased from statistics in a 2012 Commerce report (see report in the April 12, 2012, issue), but those industries’ proportional contribution to overall U.S. jobs numbers dropped slightly, Commerce said.

The Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board was correct when it declared invalid an Intertainer patent for creating and distributing videos with clickable links, said the U.S Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an opinion (in Pacer) Friday affirming PTAB's 2015 decision. Hulu had challenged the patent. Intertainer challenged PTAB's construction of various claim terms, but the Federal Circuit decision by Judges Raymond Chen and Kara Stoll and written by Sharon Prost dismissed those arguments. Intertainer didn't comment Monday.

Despite claims of proprietary formatting for imported DVD sets, a classification protest lacked necessary information, Customs and Border Protection responded to an application for further review dated in June and released this month. The DVD sets, imported by Vintage, included digital catalogs, brochures, and educational, documentary and marketing videos, CBP said. Vintage protested CBP's classification of the DVDs under one subheading and said the media is better classified under another due to proprietary formatting. The classification hinges on whether DVDs include "proprietary formatting," previously defined by CBP as "encrypted in such a way that it can only read data if the devices with which the media are used contain a decryption algorithm that is not publicly available." While Vintage said "the subject DVD sets contain data that is encrypted in such a manner that they can only be played by a machine specifically encoded to read the data properly," proprietary formatting is not "necessarily tied" to the copyrightable content of the merchandise, CBP said. The associated duty rate is 2.7 percent.