The University of Michigan, the city of Ann Arbor, Detroit patent law firms, auto manufacturers and Tier 1 suppliers are among the many who will benefit from the proximity of the new resource.  U of M Vice President for Research Stephen Forrest stated: ”The opening of a satellite office for the PTO in Detroit will have enormous benefits for the region, and of course, also for the University of Michigan….The ability to do patent business at an office in Detroit will be a boon to the many educational institutions and knowledge-based industries in the larger region.”

The most significant increase for typical copyright filers is in traditional paper applications (Form TX, VA, SR, GR). The Copyright Office has enacted a 44% increase in filing by paper — raising the fee from $45 to $65. Critics have intended that this unfairly penalizes copyright authors and owners without Internet access. The new Copyright Office fee structure took effect on August 1, 2009. A chart comparing the current and new copyright registration fees is here on the Arborlaw website.

The Court in Blackwell found that because Excel maintained a ‘master’ of the course pack, gave it to a student to copy, and accepted payment, Excel was the party actually making the photocopies, regardless of the fact that the students were performing a “self-serve checkout” as part of the commercial transaction.  (All of this despite the fact that the course packs in question were assembled under a university license that expressly permitted students to make copies of course pack materials for themselves at no additional cost.  To me, this indicates that the court was, in effect, indirectly interpreting that underlying license to only apply after one copy was purchased.)

Commentators are now hypothesizing that libraries may be next.  Section 108(f) of the US Copyright Act shields libraries from liability for infringing uses of photocopy machines as long as the libraries conspicuously post a sign stating that the user takes responsibility for copyright infringement.  LibraryLaw Blog questions whether this protection for libraries is invalidated by the Blackwell decision (I think this is unlikely, given the clear intent of Section 108 and the fact that the exemption was specifically crafted in the 1976 Act to protect libraries so that they can continue their vital role in disseminating information.)

Via TechDirt