Tag Archives: part 4 conferences

TM scholars’ roundtable, part 4

Session 2, Cont’d Mid-Point Discussants:                       Mike Grynberg Belmora may do very little.  But: Belmora may be bad if it discards important checks, one of which might be territoriality.  Another idea: arguably undermines systematicity of TM, its existence as an … 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

TM scholars’ roundtable, part 4

Research directions in Trademark Law 2017-2018 Discussants:    Bill McGeveran: History of scholarly productivity coming 1-2 years after the roundtables as seeds germinated.  Agenda-setting: boundary issues and registration.  Territorial/product dimensions; the consumers; design—picking up on something already in the air, but … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

TM roundtable, part 4

From last time: RT: I was thinking as Silbey was talking that you’re convincing me that TM should be a particular kind of anticopying regime (though, as w/patent, knowledge need not be required, at least for double identity).  And that … Continue reading

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

Notre Dame Deception Roundtable, part 4

Session 4 – Contracts and Securities Discussion Leaders: Greg Klass, Ann Lipton, Andrea Matwyshyn   Matwyshyn: there’s a duty to perform in good faith in the US, but no duty to negotiate in good faith. If you have an integration … Continue reading

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

Notre Dame Roundtable on Drassinower, Part 4

Session IV – Subject Matter and Limitations   •           Rebecca Tushnet   Drassinower defines trademark as the right to completely control the meaning of a mark as applied to a good or service: radically unidirectional, like a one-way traffic sign, … Continue reading

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

ISHTIP at Penn, part 4

Session 2 | Dina Leytes (Griesing Law, LLC), Moderator   Lord Eldon, Lord Byron, and the Public Domain Gary Dyer (Cleveland State University) Commentator | Simon Stern (University of Toronto)   Byron’s strategies to deal with Eldon’s doctrine that created … Continue reading

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