[International IP Briefing] Google's VR Patent Challenge: Why Did It Fail?

 

United States | Patent Litigation & VR Technology | November 5, 2026

Slip a smartphone into a VR headset, and suddenly you're immersed in a virtual world. But here's a practical question: how do you interact with your phone's touchscreen when it's enclosed inside the headset?

That seemingly simple challenge became the center of a patent dispute between Google and DDC Technology.

In 2022, DDC Technology sued Google and several other companies for patent infringement. Google subsequently challenged the validity of DDC's patents before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), arguing that the inventions were obvious in light of earlier technologies.

On November 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld PTAB decisions concerning three DDC Technology patents (US 9,420,075, US 10,528,199, and US 11,093,001). While some patent claims had been found unpatentable the court upheld the Board's decision that Google had failed to establish the obviousness of other challenged claims.

The patents involve technology that allows users to operate a smartphone's touchscreen through controls located outside a VR headset. In assessing Google's challenges, the PTAB considered evidence beyond earlier technical disclosures, including similarities between Google's VR viewer and DDC's products and prototypes, as well as internal emails in which Google engineers praised the technology. The Federal Circuit agreed with the Board's assessment.

 The case highlights an important aspect of patent law: determining whether an invention is obvious isn't always just about comparing technical documents. Real-world evidence, including industry recognition and indications of copying, can also play a meaningful role.

Sometimes, even a small button can become the center of a major patent dispute.

Gettyimagesbank.com

< Source >

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit- Google LLC v. DDC Technology, LLC (November 5, 2026)

[International IP Briefing] Roberto Clemente's Image on a License Plate A Tribute or an IP Dispute?

 

United States | Trademarks & Intellectual Property Rights | November 9, 2026

What happens when a legendary baseball player's image appears on a government-issued license plate? For fans, it might seem like a fitting tribute. For the player's family, however, it became a legal dispute.

The player was Roberto Clemente, the Puerto Rican baseball icon celebrated for his extraordinary career and lasting legacy.

In 2022, the Puerto Rican government introduced commemorative license plates and vehicle registration stickers featuring Clemente's name and image to mark the 50th anniversary of his 3,000th Major League Baseball hit.

But Clemente's three sons challenged the initiative, arguing that the government had used their father's name and likeness without permission. The family, which holds related trademark right, claimed that the unauthorized use amounted to an unconstitutional taking of protected property.

On November 9, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the family's appeal. A lower court had previously rejected the argument that the government's actions constituted a compensable taking under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court's decision did not, however, resolve every trademark-related issue, and certain claims may continue through separate legal proceedings.

The case raise an intriguing question: when does a public tribute involving a famous person's name or image become an intellectual property issue?

Even a government-sponsored commemorative project can raise questions about trademark rights and the commercial use of a person's identity.

Who would have thought a simple license plate could spark a complex IP debate?

Gettyimagesbank.com

< Sources >

U.S. Supreme Court- Clemente Properties v. Pierluisi-Urrutia

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Reuters- November 9, 2026

[International IP Briefing] What's Really Inside Fake Cosmetics? UK Warns of Toxic Ingredients

 

United Kingdom | Trademarks & Consumer Safety | November 2, 2026

A luxury beauty product at a fraction of its usual price might seem like a great deal. But what if the product inside the packaging is nothing like the original?

On November 2, 2026, the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO) launched its 'Face the Fakes' campaign, warning consumers about the hidden dangers of counterfeit cosmetics.

Tests on 50 seized counterfeit beauty products revealed that 40% had safety concerns with potentially harmful substances including mercury, lead, methanol, and nicotine detected.

More Than Just Fake Labels

The findings were alarming. One skin lightening contained 13,200 parts per million (ppm) of mercury, while some counterfeit lipsticks and eyeshadows contained high levels of lead. One fake perfume was found to contain approximately 80% methanol, a toxic substance that can cause severe poisoning.

The UK IPO also reported a rise in intentional counterfeit purchases among younger consumers. The proportion of beauty buyers aged 18-24 who knowingly purchased counterfeit products increased from 6% in 2023 to 20% in 2025. 

Online shopping is another concern, with around 71% of consumers who purchased counterfeit beauty and personal care products doing so online.

Why Trademark Protection Matters

Counterfeiting isn't just about copying a famous brand's name or logo. Products that bypass proper safety checks can put consumer's health at risk.

The campaign highlights an important point trademark protection isn't only about protecting brands. It also helps protect consumers and the trust they place in the products they buy.

The UK IPO encourages shoppers to buy from official or trusted retailers and to be cautious of unusually low prices or suspicious product listings.

gettyimagesbank.com

< Sources >

UK Intellectual Property Office — IPO Campaign Launched as Toxins Found in Counterfeit Beauty Products (November 2, 2026)

UK Intellectual Property Office — IPO Counterfeit Goods Research (Wave 5)