Intellectual Property

Who Qualifies for Group Registration of News Website Updates After the 2026 Rule?
Gallery
Who Qualifies for Group Registration of News Website Updates After the 2026 Rule?

Intellectual Property, Copyrights

Who Qualifies for Group Registration of News Website Updates After the 2026 Rule?

Online publishers produce a relentless stream of articles, photographs, graphics, and updates. Registering each item separately can be expensive and administratively difficult, yet leaving a publishing archive unregistered may weaken enforcement options when content is copied. The U.S. Copyright Office’s group registration option for updates to a news website—known as GRNW—was designed to close that gap. On August 13, 2026, the Office issued an immediately effective final rule that broadened and clarified which websites may use the option. For regional publications, trade journals, digital-native outlets, and specialized news sites, the amendment may make a streamlined registration practice more accessible. What is GRNW? GRNW allows an eligible publisher to register a group of updates to a news website as a collective work. Instead of depositing a complete copy of the live website, the applicant submits identifying material that represents the updates covered by the claim. The procedure recognizes the operational reality of modern publishing: a website changes constantly, pages may be dynamic, and copying an entire site at a single point in time may not accurately capture the works a publisher wants to protect. GRNW is still a registration process with defined requirements. It is not an automatic right created merely because a site occasionally posts current events. What did the 2026 final rule change? The amendment clarified the regulatory definition of a “news website.” Under the revised framework, a website does not have to cover a narrow list of traditional newspaper beats. It need only report on a variety of subjects, while its primary function must be reporting on current events and its content must be updated frequently. That clarification matters for organizations whose publishing model does not resemble a daily newspaper. A qualifying site [...]

Ex parte Baurin Reframes Obviousness-Type Double Patenting at the USPTO
Gallery
Ex parte Baurin Reframes Obviousness-Type Double Patenting at the USPTO

Patents, Intellectual Property

Ex parte Baurin Reframes Obviousness-Type Double Patenting at the USPTO

Patent families often grow in stages. A company may file a foundational application, pursue related claims in continuations, and refine its protection as a product or research program develops. That strategy can be commercially sensible—but it also creates difficult questions about obviousness-type double patenting, commonly shortened to OTDP. In August 2026, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office designated Ex parte Baurin, Appeal 2024-002920, as precedential. The Appeals Review Panel reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and reinstated an OTDP rejection involving related patent rights with different patent-term filing dates. The decision is important not because it creates a simple new formula, but because it shows how the USPTO is analyzing term, priority, issuance status, and the anti-harassment rationale behind the doctrine. What happened in Ex parte Baurin? The case involved U.S. Patent Application No. 17/135,529, directed to an antibody-like binding protein. The application was filed on December 28, 2020, and claimed priority through a chain reaching back to March 28, 2012. Based on that chain, its natural expiration date was March 28, 2032. The examiner rejected claims 1–18 for OTDP over claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,882,922 in view of an additional reference. The reference patent had an April 13, 2017 patent-term filing date, issued on January 5, 2021, and was expected to expire on April 13, 2037, plus 70 days of patent term adjustment. The parties did not dispute that the pending claims would have been obvious over the cited combination. The Board initially reversed, but the Appeals Review Panel reinstated the rejection. Its analysis focused on more than which application claimed the earliest priority date. Why the Allergan exception did not control The Federal Circuit’s Allergan decision recognized a limited protection against [...]

When Should I Trademark My Business Name?
Gallery
When Should I Trademark My Business Name?

Trademarks

When Should I Trademark My Business Name?

If you’re building a business, your name is more than a label; it’s the sign on the front door, the way customers find you, and the reputation you’re building day by day. And that’s why the timing question matters: When Should I Trademark My Business Name? The question is running circles around your head because you're not sure what point you are supposed to know that you should get your name trademarked. Here’s the honest attorney answer: sooner than most people think, but not always on day one. The right timing depends on what you’ve built so far, how confident you are in the name, and how exposed you are to someone else claiming it first. What a trademark actually does: A trademark helps protect your brand identity, your business name, logo, or slogan, so customers don’t get confused by another company using something too similar. Think of it like putting a fence around your brand. The fence doesn’t build the house for you, but it makes it harder for someone to move in next door and pretend it’s theirs. A trademark is different from: Registering an LLC or corporation (that’s a business entity, not brand protection) Buying a domain name (helpful, but doesn’t stop others) Creating social media handles (same story) You can do all three and still have zero trademark protection. The best time to trademark your business name: the “committed and visible” moment Most business owners should seriously consider trademarking when these three things are true: 1) You’re committed to the name. If you’re still brainstorming names every weekend, don’t rush to spend money filing paperwork. But once you’re past the “maybe” phase—and you’ve put the name on your website, packaging, or [...]

How Much Does a Patent Cost? Real Patent Costs, Fees, and Budgeting Tips
Gallery
How Much Does a Patent Cost? Real Patent Costs, Fees, and Budgeting Tips

Patents

How Much Does a Patent Cost? Real Patent Costs, Fees, and Budgeting Tips

If you’ve ever Googled “How Much Does a Patent Cost? Real Patent Costs, Fees, and Budgeting Tips,” you’ve probably seen answers ranging from “a few hundred bucks” to “tens of thousands.” Both can be true, and that’s exactly why people get frustrated. A patent isn’t like buying a TV where the price is on the tag. It’s more like remodeling a kitchen: the cost depends on what you’re building, how complicated it is, how much prep work is needed, and whether you want it done carefully enough to hold up when someone starts poking at it. Let’s break down what you’re actually paying for, what parts are predictable, and how to budget without getting blindsided. The three main buckets of patent cost: When you pay for a patent, you’re typically paying in three categories: 1) Government filing fees (USPTO fees) These are the fees paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to file and prosecute the application. They vary based on: The type of application (provisional, utility, design) Your entity size (micro entity, small entity, or large entity) Whether you need extra pages, extra claims, or expedited processing These fees are the most “fixed” part of the process. They’re not usually the big surprise, unless your application gets claim-heavy or you start adding extras. 2) Attorney time (strategy + writing + responding) This is usually the largest portion of the cost. Why? Because a patent is a legal document, the value of a patent lives and dies in the wording. Attorney work often includes: Invention intake and strategy (what are we protecting, and what should we leave out?) Prior art searching guidance and review (optional, but often helpful) Drafting the specification (the detailed written [...]

Can I put ® next to my logo if I “applied” for a trademark?
Gallery
Can I put ® next to my logo if I “applied” for a trademark?

Trademarks

Can I put ® next to my logo if I “applied” for a trademark?

You worked hard on your brand. You paid a designer, you picked colors, and you finally landed on a name that feels right. Then you filed a trademark application and thought, “Perfect—now can I put ® next to my logo if I 'applied' for a trademark?" Not so fast. The ® symbol is not a “we applied” symbol. It’s a “this trademark is officially registered” symbol. Using it too early can cause real problems—ironically, the exact opposite of what most business owners are trying to do when they add it. TM vs. ®: what’s the difference?: TM simply means you’re claiming trademark rights. In plain English: “This is my brand name or logo, and I’m using it to identify my goods or services.” The good news is that you can usually use TM even if you haven’t filed anything yet, as long as you’re actually using the mark in business. The ® symbol is different. It’s reserved for trademarks that have been registered by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). You can’t use ® just because you filed an application. You can’t use it because your lawyer sent the paperwork. You can’t use it because you got a receipt email. You can only use ® after the USPTO issues the registration. Think of it like a driver’s license. Filing the application is like applying at the DMV. You’re in the system, sure, but you don’t get to start driving around like you’re licensed until the state actually issues the license. So what symbol can I use while my application is pending? In most cases, use TM while your application is pending. You can place TM next to your brand name or logo on your [...]