-
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
Form v. content in DMCA notices
Still working on a long post on Garcia v. Google because ugh, but here I go on a side note: David Post has a post up, Why Google shouldn’t be the copyright court of last resort, which argues that Google … Continue reading
Does a copyright notice serve as an endorsement?
Basquiat Estate v. Christie’s, via the Trademark Blog. Plaintiffs allege ownership of the mark BASQUIAT and copyrights in Jean-Michel Basquiat’s artwork. The Estate formed an Authentication Committee to opine on the authenticity of works attributed to him. A collector who … Continue reading
Comparisons and copying of business model aren’t infringement or false advertising
Garden Catering-Hamilton Avenue, LLC v. Wally’s Chicken Coop, LLC, 2014 WL 810821, No. 3:11cv1892 (D. Conn. Feb. 28, 2014) Garden Catering alleged that its former employee, Michael Natale, prepared to open a rival restaurant, Wally’s, while employed by Garden Catering, … Continue reading
Deference to the PTO’s acceptance of a specimen and tacking
Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. v. Handi-Foil Corp., 2014 WL 794277, No. 13-cv-214 (E.D. Va. Feb. 27, 2014) Reynolds sued Handi-Foil, its competitor in the market for aluminum foil, for trade dress infringement and false advertising. Here, the court rejects Handi-Foil’s … Continue reading
What makes a fee-worthy dilution claim?
General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, 2014 WL 793090, No. 10-cv-01398 (D. Colo. Feb. 27, 2014) Some of the more recent opinions from this hard-fought case in which plaintiff won its false advertising claims but lost trademark claims. We … Continue reading
Slate on the branding of spelling (or the spelling of branding)
Marketers address unusual and downright awful grammar and spelling choices in brand names. Strange spelling may sometimes help memorability, a desired brand feature, but the law ignores bad spelling. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss
Posted in advertising, trademark
Leave a comment
The lost rights of Oz?
We know from X One X that putting public domain images on a red sequined shoe would infringe Warner’s character copyright in movie Dorothy Gale. How about this picture? Any trademark issues? http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss
Price claims are puffery, but fake Facebook page could be actionable
Imagine Medispa, LLC v. Transformations, Inc., 2014 WL 770810, No. 2:13–26923 (S.D. W. Va. Feb. 26, 2014) The parties compete in the medical weight-loss and skin care industry, in overlapping geographic areas. Plaintiff David Rubio owns Imagine. Plaintiffs alleged that … Continue reading
false comparative ads lead to profit disgorgement
General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, No. 10–cv–01398, 2014 WL 788015 (D. Colo. Feb. 27, 2014) The Rule 59(e) motion to amend judgment in this false advertising case was denied for want of clear error. The parties, General Steel … Continue reading
Trademark Scholars’ Roundtable part 3
Session 3: Comparing The Two Dimensions Discussant: Mark McKenna Why is it difficult to stick to product/geographic markets as a topic? Both dimensions have consumer-facing concerns (how will consumers actually understand the uses in different markets) and other considerations (practical … Continue reading