Author Archives: rtushnet

Insurer’s Lanham Act claim against broker proceeds through necessary implication theory

New Jersey Physicians United Reciprocal Exchange v. Boynton & Boynton, Inc., No. 12–05610, 2014 WL 317179 (D.N.J. Jan. 28, 2014) Plaintiff NJ PURE sued defendants for false advertising under the Lanham Act, libel, slander, and violations of the NJ Insurance … Continue reading →

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

Matthew Rimmer on fair use

Matthew Rimmer takes a closer look at fair use, with reference to Naomi Novik’s testimony at the recent congressional hearing.  One reaction I’ve seen to the hearing, which is something I noticed at the time, is that there weren’t any … Continue reading →

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

Sony data breach case stripped down but not gone

In re Sony Gaming Networks And Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 11md2258, 2014 WL 223677 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2014) Venkat Balasubramani’s take.  These consolidated cases arose from a criminal intrusion into Sony’s online gaming system. Plaintiffs alleged that … Continue reading →

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

Digital Copyright book: discount offer from publisher

Description from the publisher: NEW 4TH EDITION Digital Copyright Law and Practice By Simon Stokes   The first edition of this book in 2002 was the first UK text to examine digital copyright together with related areas such as performers’ rights, … Continue reading →

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

Harvard Law Review Symposium on Freedom of the Press

Copied from Balkinization.Harvard Law Review Symposium 2014: Freedom of the PressA conference in celebration of the 50th anniversary ofNew York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).February 15, 2014Harvard Law SchoolAustin North8:45 Breakfast9:20 Introduction:Mark TushnetHarvard Law School“Reflections on the … Continue reading →

Posted in first amendment, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, my writings | Leave a comment

News for storage jars: the real scandal in Virginia is the supplement

So Slate says, citing the FDA’s warning that the supplement the McDonnells helped tout is being unlawfully marketed. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

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

9th Circuit makes trademark fair use even more confusing

Aaargh. A great case for Bill McGeveran’s claim that trademark defenses have grown so rococo that they can be detrimental to legitimate uses. Experience Hendrix L.L.C. v. Hendrixlicensing.com Ltd, Nos. 11-35858 (9th Cir. Jan. 29, 2014) Defendant Pitsicalis, who licensed … Continue reading →

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

Strict liability for misleading advertising in Europe

Interesting post from Lewis Silkin about the UK’s ASA versus the EU Court of Justice: the former allowed an advertiser to rely on a third party’s representations (I think that’s a bit of a simplification–the third party was the complainant … Continue reading →

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

Nontransformative, commercial use of earnings call was fair

Swatch Group Management Services Ltd. v. Bloomberg L.P., No. 12-2412 (2d Cir. Jan. 27, 2014) Swatch sued over Bloomberg’s 2011 posting of the recording of a conference call at which Swatch executives discussed the company’s recently released earnings report with … Continue reading →

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

UK Court of Appeals rejects survey evidence in TM case, again

Marks & Clerk report on this latest instance, noting the effect of deprecating surveys on limiting the costs of litigation, which is extremely important in a loser-pays system.  High court opinion in Zee v. Zeebox; IPKat discussion of appeal; I haven’t … Continue reading →

Posted in surveys, trademark | Leave a comment