-
Recent Posts
- CFP: emerging First Amendment scholars
- “ambiguity” is taking hold in consumer protection class actions, but it’s not the Lanham Act concept
- conducting dueling internet searches converts attys into fact witnesses in TM case
- Santa Clara IP Conference: Where Do We Go From Here?
- Santa Clara IP conference: How It’s Going: What Went Wrong?
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
Tag Archives: secondary liability
Inconclusive investigation isn’t enough to give knowledge for contributory TM infringement purposes
Spy Phone Labs LLC v. Google Inc., No. 15-cv-03756-PSG, 2016 BL 86393 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2016) SPL registered Spy Phone as a mark (for something, I presume), and submitted its Android app, SPY PHONE Phone Tracker, to Google. … Continue reading
Notice and staydown: new slogan for a bad old idea
The EFF on why the cleverly named “notice and staydown” proposals are actually just “filter everything” with a better slogan. from Blogger http://ift.tt/1TO0Bl1
EU public consultation on intermediary liability
EU Delegation to the US, Public Workshop on the Digital Single Market Strategy, Consultation on Online Platforms, Cloud & Data, Liability of Intermediaries, Collaborative Economy 2003 Directive: recital says that there’s no prohibition for member states to come up … Continue reading
Manufacturer not liable for distributor’s false ads
GOJO Industries, Inc. v. Innovative Biodefense, Inc., 2015 WL 7019836, No. 15 Civ. 2946 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 12, 2015) Defendant IBD moved for a preliminary injunction against GOJO and nonparty distributors of GOJO products barring them from making representations that … Continue reading
General involvement in app production doesn’t defeat 230
Free Kick Master LLC v. Apple Inc., 2015 WL 6123058, No. 15-cv-03403 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2015) Free Kick Master has a registration for “Free Kick Master,” and sued Apple, Google, and Samsung, alleging that they all offered downloads … Continue reading
Notice and Notice Failure at BU part 2
Annemarie Bridy – Three Notice Failures in Copyright Law Challenge of making online copyright enforcement meaningful. Notice is intimately connected to justice: usually required (except with strict liability). Failures to appreciate its necessity/failures to appreciate its sufficiency. Uncertain: … Continue reading
Just another lawsuit out of Boston
Scholz v. Goudreau, 2015 WL 5554012, No. 13-cv-10951 (D. Mass. Sept. 21, 2015) Scholz and Goudreau were both members of the band Boston. Goudreau played guitar on the band’s first two albums, performing with it from 1976-1979 before leaving … Continue reading
A pox on both their steel buildings: unusual copyright and false advertising rulings
General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, — F. Supp. 3d –, No. 13-cv-00769, 2015 WL 5353080 (D. Colo. Sept. 15, 2015) A bizarre copyright fair use ruling mars this iteration of this long-running, bitter dispute between the parties, … Continue reading
11th Circuit recognizes contributory false advertising theory
Duty Free Americas, Inc. v. Estee Lauder Companies, Inc., — F.3d —- (2015), 2015 WL 4709573, No. 14–11853 (11th Cir. Aug. 7, 2015) Plaintiff DFA operates duty free stores in many international airports nationwide. It sued Estée Lauder, arguing … Continue reading
ISHTIP at Penn, Part 5
Session 3 | Marianne Dahlén (Uppsala University, Sweden), Moderator Design and Copyright: An Open Question? Stina Teilmann-Lock (University of Southern Denmark) Commentator | Jessica Silbey (Northeastern University) Openness in the law for fair followers? Design in law in … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged copyright, ISHTIP at Penn, Part 5 conferences, secondary liability
Leave a comment