-
Recent Posts
- candy buyers fail to allege difference between pumpkin & Jack-o’-lantern shape
- Amicus in section 230 false light case
- Amicus in Rise & Shine
- it’s hard to get rid of a foreign TM owner’s complaint at the motion to dismiss stage despite territoriality
- dct strikes down California’s new recyclability law on vagueness/1A grounds
Recent Comments
Archives
- September 2026
- August 2026
- July 2026
- June 2026
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- 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
Tag Archives: patent
IPSC: Comparative & International IP
Karen Sandrik, Marquette University Law School, Cultural Legacies and Innovation Barriers: Comparative Lessons from Post–Soviet Research Institutions for American Innovation Policy Slovakia: Comenius U press release about first official patent sold/assigned by a Slovak university. They spent a year negotiating … Continue reading
WIPIP: Innovation policy
Michael Burstein, The Law of the Direction of Innovation Foundational texts: NBER Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, and revisited. But we need to ask: what innovation should we prioritize? What innovation, by whom, and for whom? These are contestable … Continue reading
literal falsity might not matter with sufficiently sophisticated customers
G. W. Aru, LLC v. W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn., No. JKB-22-2636, 2025 WL 45827 (D. Md. Jan. 7, 2025) I’m skipping most of the patent parts, though they are very much present in the case and interact with a … Continue reading
false “patented/proprietary/exclusive” claims can be actionable despite Dastar
Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 2022-2160 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2024) Crocs sued competitors for patent infringement; defendant Dawgs counterclaimed for false advertising about the characteristics of the primary material Crocs uses to make its footwear products, a material … Continue reading
IPSC Breakout 4 IP and Property/Contract Theory
Shyam Balganesh, The Eunomics of Intellectual Property Lon Fuller’s institutional design theory: understand institutional design as a way of understanding institutions on the understanding that they’re not infinitely mutable. One shouldn’t begin with an unilateral approach on their ends. Ordinary … Continue reading
False patent marking claims survive even when Dastar bars false advertising claims based on “innovation”
Lashify, Inc. v. Qingdao Lashbeauty Cosmetic Co., 2024 WL 629985, No. W-22-CV-00776-ADA-DTG, No. W-22-CV-00777-ADA-DTG (W.D. Tex. Jan. 30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash … Continue reading
WIPIP session 7: Design Law
Rachael Dickson, Administrative Discrimination? At the Trademark Office [I feel like there’s a Panic! At the Disco joke to be made here.] ID manual: a searchable database of acceptable IDs of goods/services, regularly updated and changed to adapt; you can … Continue reading
WIPIP session 6: IP Theory
Andrew Gilden, Talking Pleasure in IP Courts and advocates are skeptical of value of pleasure; when they want to honor it, they reframe it as something else, like social justice. Joy of producing/consuming can be important motivation for activities, though, … Continue reading
Dastar bars false marking claims brought under Lanham Act (dubitante)
Urban Dollz LLC v. Lashify, Inc., 2023 WL 8292459, No. CV 23-1427-GW-AFMx (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2023) Super-interesting holding that, while there’s no patent field preemption against bringing false patent marking claims under the Lanham Act, Dastar (as expansively interpreted … Continue reading
accusing someone of patent infringement can be actionable disparagement if you know the patent’s invalid
Cap Export, LLC v. Zinus, Inc., 2023 WL 6381821, No. 2:21-cv-07148-JWH-MRWx (C.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2023) Cap Export alleged that Zinus fraudulently obtained a patent after Zinus used the public domain bed-in-a-box sets of a non-party as the basis for … Continue reading