Several licensors in the H.264 patent pool filed patent infringement complaints against ZTE in Dusseldorf, Germany, MPEG LA said in a Wednesday announcement. The complaints allege ZTE offers mobile phone products in Germany that use “patent-protected” H.264 methods without licenses from the individual patent holders “or a portfolio license that includes these patents offered by MPEG LA,” it said. MPEG LA runs the H.264 patent pool on behalf of three dozen licensors, which until recently included ZTE, “up to and through” the date of its last patent expiration, said MPEG LA’s website. In a separate announcement Wednesday, MPEG LA said several H.264 licensors also filed patent infringement complaints against Huawei, also in Dusseldorf. ZTE and Huawei didn't comment.

Florida's Supreme Court said it will hear oral argument April 6 on its review of Flo & Eddie's lawsuit against SiriusXM over performance royalties on sound recordings made before 1972. Flo & Eddie, who own The Turtles' “Happy Together” and the rest of the band's music, appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for a review of a 2015 U.S. District Court decision in Miami that found no specific Florida law allows for pre-1972 performance royalties. The 11th Circuit punted a decision on the Flo & Eddie appeal until the Florida Supreme Court could review whether state law allows for a pre-1972 performance royalty right (see 1606290085). The New York Court of Appeals ruled in December that state common law doesn't allow a pre-1972 performance royalty right, appearing to jeopardize Flo & Eddie's case before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (see 1612200066). Sirius XM agreed in November to a settlement that would pay Flo & Eddie at least $25 million in compensation. The settlement could reach as high as $99 million depending on the outcome of Flo & Eddie's lawsuits in California, Florida and New York (see 1611290054).

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and Internet Commerce Association separately criticized the Domain Name Association’s proposal to create a third-party mechanism akin to ICANN’s trademark-centric uniform dispute resolution policy (UDRP) that would address copyright infringement through the use of domain names. DNA proposed the mechanism Wednesday in recommendations for its Healthy Domains Initiative (see 1702080085). The UDRP-equivalent mechanism “would establish a new unregulated private legal dispute system for domain names involving claims of copyright infringement outside of any ICANN-mandated legal rights protection mechanisms,” said ICA Counsel Phil Corwin in a Friday blog post. “It would also likely slam the door shut on the growing and legitimate practice of licensing and leasing domain names with no trademark issues.” Corwin, who co-chairs ICANN’s Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All gTLDs Policy Development Process (PDP), said he's also concerned creation of a copyright UDRP equivalent could give trademark holders a way to bypass ICANN policies. The RPM PDP is reviewing ICANN’s post-delegation dispute resolution procedures, which trademark holders use to bring trademark infringement concerns directly to a domain name registry (see 1606240055). EFF believes the proposed copyright mechanism “is a terrible proposal,” said Senior Global Policy Analyst Jeremy Malcolm and Senior Staff Attorney Mitch Stoltz in a Thursday blog post: “It seems too likely that any voluntary, private dispute resolution system paid for by the complaining parties will be captured by copyright holders and become a privatized version” of the shelved 2012 Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act. EFF and ICA criticized DNA for not fully consulting its members before making the recommendation. “In any purported effort to develop a set of community-based principles, a failure to proactively reach out to affected stakeholders, especially if they have already expressed interest, exposes the effort as a sham,” EFF said. “Online service providers, in their acceptable use policies, establish the ability to address illegal behavior such as infringement, and many do,” said DNA HDI Committee Chairman Mason Cole in an email. Cole is Donuts vice president-communications and industry relations. “An alternative dispute process merely enlists a neutral third party for adjudication, relieving providers of the need to be ‘judge and jury,’” Cole said. “Suggesting that a voluntary mechanism that does something about a possible illegality is in fact serving a select few is irresponsible and preposterous. We’re interested in stewardship of the namespace for everyone.”

Songwriters of North America is opposing DOJ's motion to dismiss SONA's lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., over the Antitrust Division's controversial decision in its review of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers and Broadcast Music Inc. consent decrees (see 1608040066). SONA sued DOJ in September, filing its claim shortly before U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton ruled in BMI's New York rate case against a portion of Justice's decision on 100 percent licensing (see 1609140027 and 1609190062). SONA argued (in Pacer) earlier this week that it has standing to sue over Antitrust's findings “because [songwriters] are now suffering and will imminently suffer injuries traceable” to the decision. SONA repeated its long-standing assertion that its lawsuit is wholly separate from BMI's ongoing legal challenge to the DOJ decision, which the department appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. “Numerous issues are raised by plaintiffs’ claims that have nothing to do with the rate courts’ superintendence of the consent decrees,” SONA said. “Plaintiffs’ constitutional claim is based on theories that the 100% Mandate violates plaintiffs’ rights of procedural and substantive due process, and takes their property without compensation.” SONA also defended its claims that DOJ's finding violates both the Fifth Amendment's due process clause and the Administrative Procedure Act. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Thursday extended to March 9 DOJ's deadline to respond to SONA's opposition to the dismissal motion.

MPAA and the Software and Information Industry Association lauded reintroduction Tuesday of the Copyright Office for the Digital Economy Act (HR-890). The bill would separate the CO from the Library of Congress but keep it within the legislative branch (see 1702070045). CO “modernization enjoys bipartisan, bicameral support, as evidenced by” a CO-centric proposal from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and committee ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich. (see 1701310047), said MPAA CEO Chris Dodd in a statement. The Goodlatte/Conyers proposal suggested giving the office more autonomy from the LOC (see 1612080061 and 1612220048). Dodd also cited “statements from” Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and former committee ranking member Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. HR-890 “represents the bipartisan consensus that the way that the Copyright Office has operated in the past is no longer viable,” said SIIA Senior Vice President-Public Policy Mark MacCarthy in a statement.

The Copyright Office adopted an interim rule amending its Freedom of Information Act regulations to comply with the 2016 FOIA Improvement Act. The interim rule, to take effect March 9, provides a “clear structure for the required regulatory provisions of FOIA,” the CO said Tuesday in a Federal Register notice. The interim rule also formalizes CO practices for multitrack processing and aggregation and enhances customer service for FOIA requests, the CO said. Comments are due April 24.

India again ranked near the bottom among 45 “global economies” included in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Intellectual Property Center’s annual IP index report. GIPC ranks the 45 countries based on patents, trademarks, copyright, trade secrets, enforcement and international treaties. GIPC ranked India at 43, ahead of Pakistan and last-place Venezuela. India ranked in either last place or next-to-last in GIPC’s previous four index reports. The U.S., UK, EU-member nations and Japan continued to rank at the top of the index, with those nations holding all but two of the top 10 spots. The U.S. ranked No. 1, and Singapore and South Korea ranked at No. 8 and 9, respectively. “Emerging markets, such as India, have made incremental gains and embraced positive rhetoric with their IPR [intellectual property rights] policies, but they have not yet followed up with the legislative reforms innovators need,” said GIPC Executive Vice President Mark Elliot in a news release. “Some developed countries, including Canada and Australia, continue to implement policies that undermine their proud traditions of IP-led innovation. And even world leaders such as the U.S. have room to grow and improve.”

The Copyright Office published a final rule Monday that made technical amendments to the office’s regulations for registration, recordation, licensing and other services. The amendments mainly codify recent changes to operations, including the CO’s reorganization, which included the establishment of a chief information officer and a copyright technology office, said in a notice in the Federal Register. There was no stakeholder opposition to the technical amendments, the CO said. The office proposed the amendments in October to reflect the CO’s 2014 copyright practices compendium and include updated citations to U.S. copyright law (see 1610030021).

The Copyright Office issued a final rule Thursday allowing an author, claimant to a copyright or representative to ask the office to remove “extraneous and unnecessary” personally identifiable information from online versions of their copyright's application. PII that's eligible for removal includes driver's license numbers, Social Security numbers, banking information and credit card information, the CO said in a notice in the Federal Register. The CO agreed to a recommendation from the National Center for Transgender Equality that the office modify the rule as proposed in a September NPRM (see 1609150010) to also allow authors and claimants to replace their names in the online record amid concerns that including a transgender person's birth name in the online record could jeopardize that person's well-being. The CO declined to adopt recommendations by the National Writers Union and others seeking to eliminate the requirement that an alternative physical address be used in place of a primary address in public online registration records. Copyright Act Section 409 clearly requires that “the claimant must provide a physical mailing address -- not an electronic mailing address,” the CO said: The office has always advised applicants to “think carefully before providing a claimant’s personal physical address, and are instead encouraged to provide a third-party agent’s address, a post office box, or a non-personal email address.” It declined requests to modify a proposed $130 fee for requests to remove extraneous PII or the $60 fee for requests for reconsideration of previously denied PII removal requests.

Samsung is seeking trademark protection for the “8-Point Battery Safety Check" nomenclature it used last week to describe the safety protocol it put in place to prevent a repeat of the Galaxy Note7 fiasco (see 1701230048). Patent and Trademark Office records show Samsung applied to register the term Jan. 23, the same day it called a Seoul news conference to announce the checklist protocol it said would address device safety "from the component level to the assembly and shipment of devices." The company “has a bona fide intention, and is entitled, to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods/services,” said the application. It lists mobile phones as a category of product that could carry the trademark, but also a range of other consumer goods, including TVs, tablets and wireless headsets.