Electric Storage Battery v. Shimadzu
π 2026 Update: Changes in Copyright Law and Registration
Since the original article was published, there have been important updates in U.S. copyright law and registration processes. New rules, fees, and inquiries reflect the ongoing evolution of copyright in the digital age. Readers can find the earlier article further down for foundational information on copyright and intellectual property law.
π’ New Rules for News Website Registration
On August 13, 2026, the U.S. Copyright Office amended its Group Registration for Updates to a News Website program. The definition of a "news website" now includes those that frequently report on various subjects and current events.
This change may help more websites qualify for group registration.
π£ Exemptions for Circumvention of Access Controls
On June 9, 2026, the Copyright Office announced a notice of inquiry regarding exemptions to the prohibition against bypassing access controls on copyrighted works. This invitation for public input could lead to significant changes in how copyright laws apply to digital content and accessibility.
ποΈ Ongoing Designation for Licensing Bodies
On June 3, 2026, the Copyright Office continued the designation for the Mechanical Licensing Collective and Digital Licensee Coordinator. This decision ensures ongoing oversight and administration of licensing issues in the music industry, impacting copyright holders and users alike.
π Proposed Amendments to Registration Process
On May 28, 2026, the Copyright Office proposed amendments to the GRNW program. These amendments aim to streamline the registration process for copyright owners, making it easier to protect their works.
π Key Takeaways
- New definitions for news websites broaden eligibility for group registration.
- Public input on circumvention exemptions could reshape digital copyright laws.
- Ongoing oversight for licensing bodies ensures effective management of music rights.
- Proposed amendments aim to simplify the copyright registration process.
π‘ Tips for Understanding Copyright Registration
Review your specific situation with an attorney to ensure proper understanding of copyright laws.
π Understand the Registration Process
Familiarize yourself with the steps for both online and paper registration. The electronic Copyright Office (eCO) system is designed for ease of use and faster processing.
π Know Processing Times
Average processing times can vary. Expect about 2.5 months for claims without correspondence. Planning ahead can help you avoid delays.
π Keep Eligibility Rules in Mind
Ensure your work is original and fixed in a tangible medium. Verify that you meet the eligibility requirements before applying for copyright.
β° Be Aware of Deadlines
While there is no strict deadline for registering, doing so promptly after publication is essential for certain works to qualify for statutory damages.
π Utilize Free Resources
Make use of the U.S. Copyright Office's free resources and online tutorials. They provide helpful information and guidance on copyright matters.
π Ranked by User Reviews (2026)
This section covers services that assist with copyright registration and intellectual property. The rankings are based on Trustpilot data from October 2026, showing how customers view these services. Ratings can fluctuate, and it's essential to consider reviews carefully, as unhappy customers often leave more feedback.
π₯ 1. LegalZoom
LegalZoom has been rated 4.6. It is known for online legal document preparation and business formation services, including intellectual property registration. Some users report issues with processing delays and customer support responsiveness, so it's wise to plan accordingly.
π₯ 2. Rocket Lawyer
Rocket Lawyer holds a score of 4.5. This service is recognized for online legal document creation and subscription-based legal advice, including intellectual property services. Some users find its subscription model limiting, and others mention navigation challenges on the platform.
π₯ 3. LegalShield
LegalShield averages 4.4. It offers legal subscription services and access to a network of law firms for affordable legal assistance. Some users have reported difficulties in reaching their assigned attorneys and noted occasional slow callback times.
π Free Government and Nonprofit Help
The U.S. Copyright Office provides various free resources, including FAQs and online tutorials. Legal aid organizations may also offer low-cost or free legal assistance for copyright matters.
π What to Compare When Choosing a Service
- π Types of services offered for copyright registration.
- π¬ Customer support availability and responsiveness.
- β³ Processing times for registration applications.
- π User reviews and overall ratings.
- π΅ Costs associated with different registration options.
β Frequently Asked Questions
β What is the average cost to register a copyright?
The average cost for electronic filing is $45 for a single work by a single author. Group registrations for news websites cost $95 electronically.
π How long does it take to register a copyright?
The average processing time is about 2.5 months for claims without correspondence. Claims with correspondence may take longer.
ποΈ Are there deadlines for registering a copyright?
There are no strict deadlines, but registration must occur within three months of publication for certain works to qualify for statutory damages.
π» Can I register my work online?
Yes, you can register your work online using the electronic Copyright Office (eCO) system. This method is designed to be user-friendly.
ποΈ What resources are available for copyright help?
The U.S. Copyright Office offers free resources like FAQs and online tutorials. Legal aid organizations may also provide assistance.
π€ How does AI affect copyright?
As of August 2026, the Copyright Office is examining issues related to AI-generated works and their copyright status. This ongoing analysis may lead to new guidelines.
βοΈ Recent Cases Related to Copyright
Recent court rulings highlight ongoing developments in copyright law and its enforcement. These cases connect to the larger themes of copyright registration and intellectual property rights.
- Court Reverses Trademark Ruling in Cheerleading DisputeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Β· June 24, 2026
- Alabama court rules on Trulieve cannabis licensing disputeCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama Β· July 10, 2026
- Court rules on software copyright case against U.S. governmentCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Β· July 16, 2026
- Court Rules on Copyright Case Involving Jury Report UseDistrict Court, District of Columbia Β· May 25, 2026
For more details, browse more rulings on the news page.
End of October 2026 Update
In the
Electric Storage Battery v. Shimadzu case from 1934, the plaintiff Shimadzu was
granted patent protection after the Circuit Court had taken protection away.
The decision to remand back to the District Courtβs decision was made because
prior public use could not be proven by the defense. The plaintiff was granted
protection based on the patent obtained before commercial use of his product
began by the defendant.
Case Description
The plaintiff had developed a battery that
featured never before used chemicals and other substances. The battery was
built to last longer and was more powerful than others on the market. The
plaintiff had developed the battery in his country of residence, Japan. The
plaintiff did not patent his product in Japan nor expose it to anyone in the
United States.
A former
employee, the defendant, had worked in the factory that made the new batteries.
He began manufacturing his own batteries that used some of the same new
chemicals as the plaintiffs. The plaintiff successfully filed for his patent in
the United States but the defendant claimed his battery was already being used
by the public prior to the plaintiff obtaining a patent.
Ruling
The original ruling by the District Court was
upheld and the plaintiff's patent was ruled valid. The public use claim by the
defendant had two problems: the public use had to occur for a full two years
before the plaintiffβs patent was granted. Also, the defendantβs battery was
ruled to be in its experimental stage. An item in its experimental stage does
not qualify as being a part of public use. The plaintiff was ruled the original
patent holder of the battery and his patent claim was deemed valid. The
defendant was guilty of patent infringement due to the failure of his public
use defense.