Tag Archives: design patent

TMSR, part 3

Session 3: Defining Marks in Trademark Law vs. Defining Subject Matter in Adjacent Areas of IP In formulating rules about defining marks in trademark law, what (if anything) can be learned from the longstanding debate about defining pictorial, graphic, and … Continue reading

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

WIPIP 2019, Plenary (designs)

Whole Designs, Sarah Burstein What is a “design for a useful article”?  TLDR: it’s a whole article.  Egyptian Goddess said the infringement test has to be sameness of appearance. Must appear substantially the same to the ordinary observer. Worst design … Continue reading

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

“Next Up In Apple/Samsung Smartphone Wars: Design Patent Remedies Following The SCOTUS Decision”

Panel at the National Press Club RT: Huge debt to Sarah Burstein’s work, the best and most scholarly work on the subject—says things that aren’t clearly on either “side” of the present dispute, but I find persuasive.  Her conclusion based … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Shoes and surveys (picture post)

Since apparently there was some question whether the shoes I asked about post-Star Athletica were really shoes, here is proof: Not much less functional than the average super-high heel Also, I randomly got selected for a trademark infringement survey on … Continue reading

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

Depressed sales and asserted loss of prestige aren’t irreparable harm

Puma SE v. Forever 21, Inc., No. 17-cv-02523 (C.D. Cal. Jun. 2, 2017) H/T Sarah Burstein.  Puma sued Forever 21 for allegedly counterfeiting its Fenty line of shoes.  (Puma asserted copyright infringement and design patent infringement as well as trademark … Continue reading

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

Notre Dame Scope Roundtable, part 4

Chris Buccafusco & Mark Lemley, Screening Functionality Commentators: Abraham Drassinower and Jim Gibson Gibson: regime shopping is even more troublesome than scope problems in one regime. Design patents seem to exist purely for regime shopping; everyone wants a patent right … Continue reading

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

Notre Dame Scope Roundtable, part 2

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