Monthly Archives: December 2013

PTO/NTIA Green Paper public meeting agenda

Posted on December 6, 2013 by rtushnet

To be held December 12.  Agenda available here in pdf.  I will be speaking on the panel on the legal framework for remixes, in particular from the perspective of creators of noncommercial transformative works. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in fan fiction, fanworks, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

competitor can challenge allegedly confusing use of certifier’s TM

Posted on December 6, 2013 by rtushnet

First Data Merchant Services Corp. v. SecurityMetrics, Inc., 2013 WL 6234598, No. RDB–12–2568 (D. Md. Nov. 13, 2013) I’m only discussing the Lanham Act claims, but there are many other claims in this case.  First Data and SecurityMetrics generally sit … Continue reading →

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing, trademark | Leave a comment

software is a "good" but California claims still fail

Posted on December 6, 2013 by rtushnet

Haskins v. Symantec Corporation, 2013 WL 6234610, No. 13-cv-01834-JST  (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2013) In 2006, hackers infiltrated Symantec’s network and stole the source code used in the 2006 versions of its antivirus etc. products. Symantec allegedly knew this, but … Continue reading →

Posted in california, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing | Leave a comment

9th Circuit resoundingly rejects presumption of irreparable harm in Lanham Act cases

Posted on December 5, 2013 by rtushnet

Herb Reed Enterprises, LLC v. Florida Entertainment Opinion Management, Inc., No. 12-16868 (9th Cir. Dec. 2, 2013) Fascinating to have this case come out just as I’m teaching remedies in my trademark class.  The casebook (Ginsburg et al.) is hanging … Continue reading →

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark | Leave a comment

Dilution is more than association: but what more?

Posted on December 5, 2013 by rtushnet

The ECJ recently ruled on dilution as a ground for refusing registration. Environmental Manufacturing LLP v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM), November 14, 2013 (Case C-383/12 P).  If this is taken seriously, I can’t imagine how anyone … Continue reading →

Posted in dilution, trademark | Leave a comment

Blurred lines, part 3

Posted on December 5, 2013 by rtushnet

Panel 3: The Way Forward on Transparency: A discussion of best practices Moderator: Mary K. Engle, Associate Director, Division of Advertising Practices, FTC Examples of native ads: “sponsored” story, labeled as such in gray at the top of the headline, … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, disclosures, ftc | Leave a comment

Blurred lines: really part 2 this time

Posted on December 4, 2013 by rtushnet

Sorry for earlier posting difficulties.  The Lessons of Nauru Bob Garfield, Co-host of On the Media and MediaPost columnist Nauru: was wealthy; phosphate resource from centuries of built up guano was valuable, but only took 50 years to destroy, and … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, disclosures, ftc | Leave a comment

Blurred Lines: Advertising or Content? An FTC Workshop on Native Advertising

Posted on December 4, 2013 by rtushnet

Blurred Lines: Advertising or Content? An FTC Workshop on Native Advertising Welcoming Remarks:  Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman, FTC Advertising integrated into digital content. Recent survey of online publishers: 73% offer native advertising opportunities and 17% considering. 41% of brands and many … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, ftc | Leave a comment

perils of automated recommendation ads

Posted on December 4, 2013 by rtushnet

A promotional e-mail from Spotify included the text “Have you heard this song by Lily Allen?  Give it a try.  Fuck You.”  The ASA upheld a complaint against the ad. Though consumers were targeted for the ad because of previous genres … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising | Leave a comment

AU’s post-argument panel on Lexmark v. Static Control

Posted on December 4, 2013 by rtushnet

Oral argument transcript here: Most of the questions seemed to me more favorable to Static Control, though Kennedy said almost nothing. Steven B. Loy – Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC, representing Lexmark Lexmark makes printers and cartridges: position is that primary … Continue reading →

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, standing | Leave a comment