Author Archives: rtushnet

The Next Great Copyright Act Conference, part 3

Posted on April 3, 2014 by rtushnet

Secondary Liability and Safe Harbors Moderator: Andrew Bridges, Fenwick & West LLP Shira Perlmutter, USPTO §512 was intensively negotiated and complex; intended to be a very careful balancing act, so carefully balanced that the participants would’ve told you that every … Continue reading →

Posted in copyright, dmca, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, secondary liability | Leave a comment

The Next Great Copyright Act Conference, part 2

Posted on April 3, 2014 by rtushnet

Exclusive Rights and Infringement Moderator: Kristen McCallion, Fish & Richardson Gerard Lewis, Comcast Courts have enshrined various business models—is that a good model going forward?  Public performance: relatively new right. History of figuring out whether communication to the public was … Continue reading →

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

The Next Great Copyright Act Conference, Berkeley: part 1

Posted on April 3, 2014 by rtushnet

Copyright Subject Matter and Formalities Moderator: Daralyn Durie, Durie Tangri Tony Reese, UC Irvine Law School Revising the © Act will require defining the scope of subject matter; not recently controversial but important threshold question—hard to evaluate rights and remedies … Continue reading →

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

mandatory disclosure doesn’t have to correct deception

Posted on April 2, 2014 by rtushnet

American Meat Institute v. United States Department of Agriculture, No. 13-5281 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 28, 2014) The court rejects challenges to meat labeling rules that demonstrate once again that commercial speech regulation and the post-Lochner settlement are inextricably linked. Here, … Continue reading →

Posted in commercial speech, disclosures, first amendment | Leave a comment

It’s an ex-competitor: plaintiff whose service shuffled off this mortal coil lacks standing

Posted on April 1, 2014 by rtushnet

Think Computer Corp. v. Dwolla, Inc., No. 13–CV–02054, 2014 WL 1266213 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2014) Think is a money service business (MSB) and developer of a mobile payment system platform called FaceCash, launched in April 2010.  Defendants were money … Continue reading →

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

Knockout (fruit) punch: Pom class decertified

Posted on April 1, 2014 by rtushnet

In re Pom Wonderful LLC Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, No. ML 10–02199, 2014 WL 1225184 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 25, 2014) In what defendants doubtless hope is a winning trend, the court decertified a class on the ground that it’s … Continue reading →

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

The PTO for children

Posted on April 1, 2014 by rtushnet

I recently attended an event at which the PTO had a children’s booth.  Highlights from the Oct. 2012 Trademark Activity Book we received: The PTO has Kleenex and Band-Aid’s back against the threat of genericity. The PTO is not worried … Continue reading →

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

TM issues, you get what you pay for edition

Posted on April 1, 2014 by rtushnet

Marty Schwimmer reports on the Orthodox Jewish Congregations’ lawsuit against Urban Tortilla for the latter’s new U-in-a-circle logo. Schwimmer continues that Urban Tortilla paid $299 for its logo, from a contest among designers.  (See also: continuing immiseration of many creative … Continue reading →

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

tuna surprise: undisclosed slack fill was plausibly misleading

Posted on March 31, 2014 by rtushnet

Hendricks v. StarKist Co., No. 13–cv–729, 2014 WL 1244770 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 25, 2014) Hendricks brought the usual California claims against Starkist alleging that its canned tuna products were underfilled (anywhere from 1.1% to 17.3% less tuna than there was … Continue reading →

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

"I wouldn’t have bought it if I’d known" is enough for standing, 9th Circuit says again

Posted on March 31, 2014 by rtushnet

Galope v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 12–56892, 2014 WL 1244279 (9th Cir. Mar. 27, 2014) The court of appeals reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of Deutsche Bank and other defendants.  Galope adequately alleged that she … Continue reading →

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