-
Recent Posts
- trademark law firm loses trademark lawsuit
- license agreement termination might be invalid transfer in gross without a new partner for licensor
- Reading list and comments: Doctrine, Data, and the Death of DuPont
- reasonable consumers read promotion terms on a gambling app, court rules
- Third Circuit affirms disgorgement award in “Made in the USA” case
Recent Comments
Archives
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- June 2013
Categories
- 230
- acpa
- advertising
- antitrust
- art law
- attribution
- blogging
- california
- cfaa
- cfps
- class actions
- cmi
- comics
- commercial speech
- conferences
- consumer protection
- contracts
- copying
- copyright
- counterfeiting
- cultural property
- damages
- dastar
- defamation
- design patent
- dilution
- disclosures
- disparagement
- dmca
- drm
- fan fiction
- fanworks
- fda
- fees
- first amendment
- ftc
- geographic indications
- http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post
- insurance
- jurisdiction
- libraries
- misappropriation
- music
- my lawsuits
- my writings
- parody
- patent
- patents
- preemption
- presentations
- privacy
- procedure
- reading list
- remedies
- right of publicity
- secondary liability
- securities
- standing
- surveys
- teaching
- tortious interference
- trade secrets
- trademark
- traditional knowledge
- Uncategorized
- unconscionability
- unfairness
- warranties
Meta
Monthly Archives: April 2018
TM scholars’ roundtable, part 2
Session 1, Cont’d Mid-Point Discussants: Stacey Dogan: pre-20th c, very few cases of claims based on noncompeting goods, and even fewer with actual harm stories. Can be characterized as chance or as the functions of the markets of the day, … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged part 2 conferences, TM Scholars' Roundtable, trademark
Leave a comment
TM Scholars’ roundtable, part 1
Trademark Scholars’ Roundtable, 10th year! Session 1: The Distinction Between Trademark and Unfair Competition Law Introduction: Mark McKenna: Until mid 20th c, could have said that TM and UC were distinct legal claims that vindicated the same right; thus … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged part 1 conferences, TM Scholars' Roundtable, trademark
Leave a comment
can investigating claims bind you to arbitration?
LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C. v. LegalZoom.com, Inc., 2018 WL 1738135, No. 17-cv-07194-MMC (N.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2018) LegalZoom, which advertises its ability to help people register trademarks, allegedly makes “false comparisons to attorney led services” and engages in the unauthorized … Continue reading
1201 exemption hearing: filmmaking and ebooks
PROPOSED CLASS 1: Audiovisual Works—Criticism and Comment—E-Books and Filmmaking Michael C. Donaldson, FilmIndependent, International Documentary Association, Kartemquin Educational Films, Inc., Independent Filmmaker Project, University of Film and Video Association, The Alliance for Media Arts+Culture (“Joint Filmmakers”): Discusses use of film … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged 1201 exemption hearing: filmmaking and ebooks 1201, copyright, dmca, drm, fanworks
Leave a comment
Consumer class action fails for failure to survey on the exact statements challenged
Townsend v. Monster Beverage Corp., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2018 WL 1662131, No. 12–2188–VAP (KKx) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2018) The Ninth Circuit remanded this case on UCL, FAL, and CLRA claims insofar as they challenge four specific on-label representations of … Continue reading
we said the meal was a “value,” we just didn’t say to whom
Killeen v. McDonald’s Corp., 2018 WL 1695366, No. 17 CV 874 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 6, 2018) Courts will only rarely protect consumers against their inability in the moment to do math; this is not one of those times. Killeen alleged … Continue reading
Recent acquisitions: really bad court decisions edition
Tarkay and Patricia Govezensky posters, from Romm Art Creations v. Simcha Int’l, Inc., 786 F.Supp. 1126 (E.D.N.Y. 1992), an absolutely terrible decision finding that the “Women and Cafes” style was inherently distinctive and thus had secondary meaning and high strength … Continue reading
The truth is out there, but it might violate the right of publicity
Scott v. Citizen Watch Co., No. 17-cv-00436-NC, 2018 WL 1626773 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 2018) This case would be the poster child for the need for a true reckoning between modern right of publicity law and the modern First Amendment, … Continue reading
make your own sexual reference: 9th Circuit partially reinstates male enhancement lawsuit
Sandoval v. PharmaCare US, Inc., No. 16-56301, No. 16-56710, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2018 WL 1633011 (9th Cir. Apr. 5, 2018) Sandoval brought a putative class action claim based on PharmaCare’s statements about its “male enhancement” product IntenseX. The court of … Continue reading