-
Recent Posts
- Mexican flag and “taste of Mexico” not enough to deceive reasonable consumers about non-Mexican origin, 2d Cir rules
- court: there’s no right to jury trial when seeking only injunction/disgorgement in false advertising case
- alleged price bait-and-switch with large “processing fee” suffices to plead Lanham Act false advertising
- Great balls of fire: lawsuit over malt sold looking nearly identical to whisky can continue
- Second Circuit signals some minimal flexibility on Polaroid analysis in another strip club false endorsement case
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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
Category Archives: secondary liability
11th Circuit recognizes contributory false advertising theory
Duty Free Americas, Inc. v. Estee Lauder Companies, Inc., — F.3d —- (2015), 2015 WL 4709573, No. 14–11853 (11th Cir. Aug. 7, 2015) Plaintiff DFA operates duty free stores in many international airports nationwide. It sued Estée Lauder, arguing … Continue reading
ISHTIP at Penn, Part 5
Session 3 | Marianne Dahlén (Uppsala University, Sweden), Moderator Design and Copyright: An Open Question? Stina Teilmann-Lock (University of Southern Denmark) Commentator | Jessica Silbey (Northeastern University) Openness in the law for fair followers? Design in law in … Continue reading
Click click boom: affiliate marketing network liable for affiliates’ false advertising
FTC v. LeanSpa, LLC, No. 11-CV-1715 (D. Conn. Mar. 5, 2015) The FTC challenged the use of fake news (and no, they don’t mean The Daily Show) to sell LeanSpa’s weight-loss and colon-cleanse products online. LeanSpa sold its products … Continue reading
court declines to dismiss hashtag infringement claim
Fraternity Collection, LLC v. Fargnoli, 2015 WL 1486375, No. 3:13–CV–664 (S.D. Miss. Mar. 31, 2015) Fraternity Collection designs and sells shirt, including the “Pocket Shirt,” a custom article of clothing in which customers pick a particular style of shirt … Continue reading
Reading list: Campbell at 21/Sony at 31
Jessica Litman, Campbell at 21/Sony at 31. As you’d expect, insightful and a pleasure to read. Extracts: When copyright lawyers gather to discuss fair use these days, the most common refrain is its alarming expansion. This distress about fair … Continue reading
selling a book without authorization doesn’t violate Lanham Act
Smith v. BarnesandNoble.com, LLC, No. 1:12-cv-04374, 2014 BL 263099 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2014) Smith wrote a book, Hardscrabble. He contracted with Smashwords, an online ebook distributor, to sell his book. Smashwords distributed Smith’s book to its retail partners, including B&N, … Continue reading
serial infringement may justify liability under Tiffany v. eBay
Mori Lee, LLC v. Sears Holdings Corp., 2014 WL 4680739, No. 13cv3656 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2014) Mori Lee, a dressmaker, sued Sears for trademark infringement and unfair competition. In 2010, Sears opened an online marketplace at Sears.com where third-party merchants … Continue reading
Oh No They Didn’t infringe: Livejournal gets DMCA safe harbor
Eric Goldman on Mavrix Photographs LLC v. LiveJournal, Inc., No. 8:13-cv-00517-CJC-JPR (C.D. Cal. Sept. 19, 2014): plaintiff refuses to send DMCA notices to host website, sues instead. As Eric says, this is a great case for a fee-shift, since (1) … Continue reading
SCIPR, patents (Limelight/Medtronic)
(Ed. note: as is clear from my notes, I have a somewhat Gingerly approach to patent law. My apologies for any inaccuracies.) Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies (Induced infringement when defendants have not directly infringed.) Medtronic v. Mirowski Family Ventures, … Continue reading
Dodged a virus and copyright liability: Court rules unused copy isn’t infringing
Design Data Corp. v. Unigate Enterprise, Inc., 2014 WL 3868076, No. 12–cv–04131 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2014) The court found that defendants couldn’t be liable for copyright infringement when the only copying they ever did consisted of downloading, but not … Continue reading