Peter M. Brody
Peter Brody has been successfully litigating intellectual property cases and other complex disputes in federal and state courts across the United States for over 30 years. A member and former chair of Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property litigation group, Peter has litigated every type of IP case –patent, copyright, trade secret, trademark, and false advertising - as well as a wide range of constitutional, administrative, and contract disputes. Peter also has substantial experience in alcoholic beverage laws and regulations. In addition to his trial and appellate practice, Peter has served as lead counsel in numerous domestic and international arbitrations, as well as hearings and proceedings before federal and state administrative agencies. Peter’s broad-based litigation experience enables him to see the big picture and to present complicated and technical matters in a clear and easy to understand manner. His extensive knowledge of intellectual property law, careful case preparation, and skilled advocacy are valued by leading companies in a wide array of business sectors, including consumer electronics, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, financial services, personal care, and food and wine.
Peter is also an active member of the firm’s social media group. He routinely advises clients on trademark and copyright protection and enforcement in the social media arena, best practices for protecting confidential information and trade secrets from disclosure on social media sites, and federal and state regulation of advertising and promotion via social media. Peter also helps clients protect themselves from – and respond to – incidents of doxing (doxxing). In addition, Peter serves on the Advisory Board of Bloomberg BNA’s Social Media Law & Policy Report.
Peter also lectures and writes extensively on social media, intellectual property and alcoholic beverage law and practice.
- In re Products Having Laminated Packaging, Laminated Packaging, and Components Thereof: Co-lead counsel for Diageo North America in the first investigation of the ITC’s pilot program for possible early disposition of cases. Following an accelerated trial on the economic prong of domestic industry, the Commission found that the complainant (a non-practicing entity) failed to satisfy the economic prong and terminated the investigation.
- TRIA Beauty v. Radiancy, Inc.: Lead trial counsel for an FDA-regulated medical device manufacturer in a false advertising lawsuit brought against a competitor marketing an unregulated device with false claims.
- YSL Beauté v. Oscar de la Renta, Ltd.: Lead trial counsel for an international fashion house in a successful year-long international arbitration over termination of the client’s global trademark license agreement for fragrances and cosmetics.
- LG Electronics v. Quanta Computer Corp.: Lead trial counsel for the plaintiff in a recent patent infringement suit involving various aspects of DVD technology.
- Schick Mfg., Inc., et al. v. The Gillette Company: Lead trial counsel for Gillette in a series of unfair competition and false advertising actions with its primary competitor.
- Mansell et al. v. Raytheon Company, et al.: Lead trial counsel for the defendants in a patent royalty suit involving GPS vehicle tracking systems, tried to a jury.
- Bronco Wine Company v. California: Lead counsel for the plaintiff, a major U.S. wine producer, in a lawsuit challenging, on constitutional grounds, a state statute retroactively restricting the use of certain geographic trademarks. The litigation included two appeals to the California Supreme Court.
- Clients in the wine and spirits industry include Bronco Wine Company; Sutter Home Winery; The Michael Mondavi Family; Grupo Osborne, S.A.; Fratelli Branca, S.A.; Miguel Torres, S.A.; Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne; Bureau National Interprofessionnel du Cognac; and Institut National des Appellations d’Origine.
- Quoted, “Federal Agencies Train Spotlight on Social Media Ads,” Bloomberg BNA Electronic Commerce & Law Report (January 6, 2016)
- Quoted, “Justices Say Facebook Threat Prosecution Requires Proof Poster Had Criminal Intent,” Bloomberg BNA Social Media Law & Policy Report (June 2, 2015)
- Quoted, “4th Cir.’s Latest Remand of Paper Towel Trademark Dispute Is Over Applying Octane,” Bloomberg BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (April 3, 2015)
- Co-author, “Social Media and Patent Eligibility,” Bloomberg BNA Social Media Law & Policy Report (March 24, 2015)
- Quoted, “US Supreme Court Says USPTO rulings can prevent re-litigation,” Antarctic Today (March 25, 2015)
- Quoted, “Attorneys React To Supreme Court's TTAB Preclusion Ruling,” Law360 (March 24, 2015)
- Quoted, “Octane’s Creep Into Lanham Act Cases Continues; Deliberately Low Fees Award Given,” Bloomberg BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (January 30, 2015)
- Quoted, ”SCOTUS Ruling, Irreparable Harm Standard, ‘Redskins’ Case Are Top 2015 TM Issues,” Bloomberg BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (January 23, 2015)
- Co-author, “Fee-Shifting Under the Lanham Act in the Wake of Octane and Highmark,” Managing Intellectual Property (December 11, 2014)
- Quoted, “Check the Label (Or It Could Cost You Millions),” Managing Intellectual Property (October 23, 2014)
- Quoted, “Facebook Fan Page Manager Didn’t Own Over 6 Million Likes on Site, Court Holds,” Social Media Law & Policy Report (August 27, 2014)
- Quoted, “Sky Not Falling after Pom v. Coke Decision,” Wine & Spirits Daily (June 20, 2014)
- Quoted, “Supreme Court’s POM Ruling Will Impact More Than Food And Drink,” Managing Intellectual Property (June 18, 2014)
- Co-author, “POM V. Coke May Impact Many FDA-Regulated Products,” Law360 (May 8, 2014)
- Quoted, “Coke Argues FDCA Preempts Lanham Claim; Justices Reveal Discomfort With Label,” Bloomberg BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (April 21, 2014)<
- “Preclusion, Primary Jurisdiction, and Private Enforcement: The Intersection of the Lanham Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,” Bloomberg BNA’s Pharmaceutical Law and Industry Report (April 18, 2014) and Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (May 2, 2014)
- Quoted, “Supreme Court Inks Out Test for Who Can Bring Federal False-Advertising Claims,” Westlaw Journal Computer and Internet (April 10, 2014)
- Quoted, “Brand Owner Concerns Grow Over .Sucks GTLD,” Managing Intellectual Property (April 11, 2014)
- Co-author, “A New Test For False Ad Standing Under Lanham Act,” Law360 (April 8, 2014)
- Quoted, “New Net domains expand Web addressing system,” USA Today (February 4, 2014)
- Quoted, “Jurisdictions Outside U.S. Addressing Employer Ownership of Social Media Data,” Social Media Law & Policy Report (January 15, 2014)
- Quoted, “ICANN Domain Expansion Means More Work to Protect Brands Online,” Corporate Counsel/The American Lawyer (March 12, 2013)
- Quoted, “Clock Ticking For TM Owners To Protest New Web Domains,” Law360 (March 8, 2013)
- Co-author, “Ten Things You Need to Know About Social Media and Intellectual Property in 2013,” Bloomberg BNA Social Media Law & Policy Report (January 8, 2013); Bloomberg BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (January 25, 2013)
- Quoted, “Does Covenant Not to Sue Bar Court From Weighing Trademark Validity?” Bloomberg BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal (November 16, 2012)
- Quoted, “Already V Nike Could Increase Litigation Risk For Trade Mark Owners,” Managing IP (November 9, 2012)
- Quoted, “Justices Eye Nike's Deal Not To Sue In Trademark Case,” IP Law360 (November 7, 2012)
- Speaker, “Internet & U.S. Data Handling,” Ropes & Gray IPMC Financial Services Roundtable (April 7, 2014)