Category Archives: Uncategorized

Notre Dame Scope Roundtable, part 3

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Pam Samuelson, Functional Compilations Commentators: Zahr Said and Steve Yelderman Said: Framing questions: what is functionality? Does it differ in compilations v. other things?  Is it the same as the useful articles doctrine?  How do owners/litigants determine and assess functionality? … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Opinion in my suit against ICE

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Tushnet v. U.S. Immig. & Customs Enforcement, No. 1:15-cv-00907 (D.D.C. filed Mar. 31, 2017) Thanks to my able counsel Michael Kirkpatrick of Public Citizen, initially assisted by Georgetown students from the Institute for Public Representation.  Here, the district court denies … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Notre Dame Scope Roundtable, part 2

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Jeanne Fromer & Mark McKenna, Claiming Design Commentators: Sarah Burstein and Rebecca Tushnet RT: Great paper exploring the ways that different claiming regimes contribute to producers’ ability to maximize rights by claiming under multiple overlapping regimes, copyright, design patent, and … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Roundtable on the Scope of IP Rights, Notre Dame Law School

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Barton Beebe & Scott Hemphill, The Scope of Strong Marks: Should Trademark Law Protect the Strong More Than the Weak? Commentators: Mike Grynberg and Mark Lemley Grynberg: Doctrine developed for certain situations may not make sense for other situations, including … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Reading list: Placebo effects of marketing

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Yann Cornil et al., Does Red Bull Give Wings to Vodka? Placebo Effects of Marketing Labels on Perceived Intoxication and Risky Attitudes and Behaviors Forthcoming, Journal of Consumer Psychology Abstract: Why sexual assaults and car accidents are associated with the … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Reading list: Pam Samuelson on bottom-up and top-down theories of fair use

Posted on March 31, 2017 by rtushnet

Pamela Samuelson, The Relative Virtues of Bottom-Up and Top-Down Theories of Fair Use A Response to Abraham Bell and Gideon Parchomovsky, The Dual-Grant Theory of Fair Use, 83 U Chi L Rev 1051 (2016). Abstract: This Essay explains why I … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

internal studies on consumer preference support class action treatment for weed killer claims

Posted on March 29, 2017 by rtushnet

Martin v. Monsanto Co., No. 16–2168, 2017 WL 1115167 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2017) This case grants class certification, illustrating the use of internal consumer research in class action practice.  The probabilistic nature of consumer reaction is not necessarily a … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Plaintiff doesn’t have to rebut 230 immunity in complaint against multiple parties

Posted on March 29, 2017 by rtushnet

Moretti v. Hertz Corp., No. 14-469, 2017 WL 1032783 (D. Del. Mar. 17, 2017) Moretti sued for violation of California’s false advertising, consumer protection, and unfair and deceptive trade practices laws, and common law fraud.  Moretti alleged that prices for … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

False advertising of sperm donor leads to wrongful birth claim

Posted on March 29, 2017 by rtushnet

Doe 1 v. Xytex Corp., No. C 16-02935, 2017 WL 1112996 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2017)| A false advertising case arising out of a wrongful birth claim: Does One and Two used xytex.com, which sold human semen for use in … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Dastar/preemption bars claims based on allegedly false claims of credit for innovation

Posted on March 24, 2017 by rtushnet

OptoLum, Inc. v. Cree, Inc., No. CV-16-03828, 2017 WL 1057924 (D. Ariz. Mar. 21, 2017) The parties compete in the market for LED lights. OptoLum claims to be the inventor of technology used inside LED bulbs allowing them to have … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment