-
Recent Posts
- WIPIP Panel 6: Design and Brand; Protectable Subject Matter; Copyright Theory and Doctrine II
- WIPIP Panel 5: Trademark Doctrine
- WIPIP Panel 4: Emerging Technologies
- “shipping protection fee” providing no extra protection was plausibly misleading drip pricing
- WIPIP Panel 3: Deepfakes, Celebrities, and Movies
Recent Comments
Archives
- February 2026
- January 2026
- 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
Category Archives: trademark
Trademark exceptionalism wins another round in Maryland
Hershey Co. v. Friends of Steve Hershey, 2014 WL 3571691, No. WDQ–14–1825 (D. Md. July 17, 2014) Thanks to prodding from Eric Goldman for me to blog about it, here’s a case where we learn that the only constraint on … Continue reading
Posted in first amendment, trademark
Leave a comment
regulating TM owner’s confusing use of TM doesn’t violate First Amendment
AEP Texas Comm. & Indus. Retail Ltd. P’ship v. Public Util. Comm’n, 2014 WL 3558763, No. 03–13–00358–CV, — S.W.3d – (Tex. Ct. App. July 17, 2014) A complicated regulatory background is the setting for this case about the evidence required … Continue reading
FTC goes after misleading certification mark
Here’s some discussion of the FTC’s complaint from the FTC itself, with a link to the proposed settlement. Unsurprising takeaway: If you purport to certify products as “Made in the USA,” it is a good idea to do some verification … Continue reading
trademark beats copyright at surviving motion to dismiss
Gorski v. Gymboree Corp., 2014 WL 3533324, No. 14-CV-01314 (N.D. Cal. July 16, 2014) Via Eric Goldman. Gorski and Gymboree both make shirts that feature the phrase “lettuce turnip the beet.” Gorski sued for copyright and trademark infringement; Gorski owns … Continue reading
Uber/under: false advertising and association claims against Uber continue
Yellow Group LLC v. Uber Technologies Inc., No. 12 C 7967, 2014 WL 3396055 (N.D. Ill. July 10, 2014) Taxi medallion owners, taxi affiliations (taxi dispatch services), and livery service providers sued Uber, alleging that it competed unfairly by misrepresenting … Continue reading
When all you have is a Captain Hammer …
The costumed performers who importune passersby in Times Square are not universally beloved. Via the WSJ comes this suggestion for getting rid of them: State Sen. Brad Hoylman, whose district includes Times Square, said the companies that created the characters … Continue reading
intent to use successful term in ads isn’t intent to confuse
Overstock.com, Inc. v. Nomorerack.com, Inc., No. 2:13-CV-1095 (D. Utah June 30, 2014) Overstock sells a lot of stuff online: over one million products, with over six million customers last year. Nomorerack directly competes with Overstock, and has sold more than … Continue reading
Posted in trademark
Leave a comment
Your daily unauthorized use
Geisinger Medical Center is expanding. Here’s one of the images of what the new version will look like: Okay, but who are those handsome devils (also in Slide 17 of the Geisinger slide show)? Could it be Sam and Dean … Continue reading
Posted in right of publicity, trademark
Leave a comment
NY statutory law covers B2B false advertising, but common law unfair competition doesn’t
Leason Ellis LLP v. Patent & Trademark Agency LLC, No. 13 CV 2880 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2014) Leason Ellis (of Trademark Blog fame) sued PTA for false advertising, unfair competition, deceptive business practices, and tortious interference with prospective economic relations. … Continue reading
AU Gender/IP call for papers
The Women and the Law Programand the Program on Information Justice & Intellectual Property American University Washington College of Law Call for Papers: Eleventh Annual IP/Gender Symposium Save the Date: Friday February 27, 2015 This year, we will engage in a … Continue reading