snIP/ITs Insights on Canadian Technology and Intellectual Property Law

Monthly Archives: October 2015

Data Transfers from EU to US “unlawful”; EU Signals Enforcement Actions Possible After January, 2016

Posted in Privacy

On Friday, October 16, 2015, the Article 29 Working Party (“WP29”) released a statement on the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in the case Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner (C-362-14), the landmark decision which invalidated the decision of the European Commission underpinning the Safe Harbour framework by which personal information was permitted to move from the EU to the United States.… Continue Reading

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: What’s in it for Telecommunications, E-Commerce and Intellectual Property?

Posted in E-Commerce, Intellectual Property

On October 5, 2015, Canada and the following 11 Pacific Rim countries: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States and Vietnam, have reached a deal on the content of new free-trade agreement covering the Pacific region, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (the “TPP”). Although the final treaty text has yet to be settled and released, some information about the agreement has been released by many of the participating governments, including Canada. The content of the TPP covers a wide variety of economic activities and sectors, including, among others, telecommunications, e-commerce and intellectual property.  … Continue Reading

A Matter for Expert Evidence: No Obligation to Identify Combinations of Prior Art for Obviousness

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patents

Litigants seeking to invalidate claims of a patent invariably allege that the invention claimed by the asserted patent would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. An allegation of obviousness typically relies on a mosaic of prior art combined with the skilled person’s common general knowledge to show that the inventive concept would have been obvious. A recent decision of Justice Heneghan of the Federal Court has clarified the extent to which a party alleging obviousness has to particularize the specific combinations asserted to render the inventive concept obvious.

In Crude Solutions Limited et al Continue Reading

Europe’s Top Court Invalidates ‘Safe Habour’ Data Transfer Framework

Posted in Privacy, Regulatory Compliance

On October 6, 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) declared that the US-EU Safe Harbour framework is invalid, striking it down in the highly anticipated case of Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner. The decision is effective immediately, with far-reaching and widespread implications for entities with multinational data flows.

Since EU data protection laws purport to apply to the processing of personal data regardless of whether the individuals affected are EU citizens or not, or are physically present in the EU or not, the potential impacts of this decision go beyond those organizations with … Continue Reading

Who Goes There? Protecting Intellectual Property Relating to Payment Innovation

Posted in Fintech, Intellectual Property, Patents

The payments space is undergoing a period of rapid innovation, resulting in traditional financial institutions competing more and more directly with large technology companies such as Apple, Google, Samsung and Facebook. Unsurprisingly, various players in the payments industry have been filing patents to protect their proprietary technologies for various payment functionalities, ranging from central elements of a payment transaction (such as core payment processing algorithms), to other ancillary, but necessary, aspects of a payment transaction, such as authentication and tokenization methods.… Continue Reading

Chambers Canada 2016 Results – Technology Law

Posted in Awards and Recognitions

On October 2, 2015, the inaugural edition of the Chambers Canada Guide was launched (in previous years, Canada was part of the Global Guide). Once again, McCarthy Tétrault LLP is the highest ranking technology law firm in Canada (Band 1). McCarthy’s is the only firm in Canada with four lawyers ranked Band 2 or higher.

Chambers has recognized a number of our lawyers as leading practitioners in the areas of Information Technology, Telecommunications & Broadcasting, Intellectual Property and Data Protection.  These leading practitioners and Chambers commentary are as follows:… Continue Reading

Law Society of British Columbia Rule Change Re: Cloud Computing in the Legal Industry

Posted in Regulatory Compliance

Introduction

Many businesses have harnessed cloud computing to improve the way they manage and deliver computing resources. The benefits of cloud computing include cost effectiveness, scalability and accessibility. However, since cloud computing services are provided through a shared pool of computing resources, which often includes the storage and processing of data in third-party data centres, the cloud computing model has inherent risks related to service uptime, records retention, and data privacy and security. Lawyers should approach cloud computing with caution because of these risks, the highly confidential information they hold on behalf of their clients, and their professional responsibilities.

This … Continue Reading

Prepare to Launch – Part 1: Insights from Vancouver Startup Week

Posted in M&A/Finance, Startups

McCarthy Tétrault LLP was delighted to recently host a sold-out crowd at our feature event as part of Vancouver Startup Week, a week-long celebration of Vancouver’s unique entrepreneurial spirit and innovative technology community.

Prepare for Launch”, an interactive panel moderated by McCarthy Tétrault’s Genevieve Pinto, featured guests Eric Bukovinsky, Principal, Yaletown Venture Partners; Ryan Spong, Co-Founder & CEO, Foodee; and Spencer Thompson, Founder & CEO, Sokanu, among others.… Continue Reading

Playing Innovation Catch-up? You Need Bargaining Chips

Posted in Intellectual Property

With the exponential growth of game-changing technology, it is easy for an incumbent industry player to be caught flat-footed. Suddenly, the business model has evolved dramatically and the incumbent finds themselves playing innovation catch-up. The usual response is to become a ‘fast follower’. This seems like a viable strategy until the incumbent finds out that the new innovators have laid a minefield of patents in their way. In some cases, the incumbent may either be completely blocked or be faced with paying an exorbitant royalty to stay in business. How can an incumbent level the playing field?… Continue Reading