-
Recent Posts
- “no soy protein” claim for dog food plausibly indicates no soy
- Statements in book promoting addiction treatment protected by Cal anti-SLAPP law
- Mislabeled image of competitor’s LED screen as LG’s gets LG in trouble
- Selling scammy books is protected by the First Amendment when selling scammy products isn’t
- negative inference about other juices from “no sugar added” on D’s juice is implausible
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: trademark
Mislabeled image of competitor’s LED screen as LG’s gets LG in trouble
Sansi North America, LLC v. LG Electronics USA, Inc., 2019 WL 8168069, No. CV 18-3541 PSG (SKx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2019) LG used a picture of Sansi’s LED displays in an article for a trade publication and accidentally labeled … Continue reading
Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford part 3
Session 3: Remedies in Trademark and Unfair Competition Cases Introduction: Mark Lemley, Leah Chan Grinvald Discussant: Laura Heymann, Eric Goldman [I had another conference in the morning so came in late.] Discussion of eBay’s effects. Burrell: In other … Continue reading
Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford part 2
Session 2: A Forward-Looking Perspective To what extent should trademark or unfair competition law reflect consumer expectations or seek to shape or set them? Introduction: Rebecca Tushnet One consideration in how we should structure the regime is that casual … Continue reading
Trademark Scholars Roundtable, Stanford
Trademark Scholars Roundtable Session 1: The Current Framework To what extent does current trademark or unfair competition law reflect consumer expectations or seek to shape or set them? Introduction: Stacey Dogan Categorize rules as norm shaping v. norm following. … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Stanford conferences, trademark, Trademark Scholars Roundtable
Leave a comment
They chose unwisely: court blows another hole in Rogers by refusing to say that explicit means explicit
Chooseco LLC v. Netflix, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-08 (D. Vt. Feb. 11, 2020) Explicit doesn’t mean explicit in yet another sign of the pressure the Rogers test is under. Chooseco sued Netflix for infringement (etc.) of its rights in Choose Your … Continue reading
when you buy a business whose mark is the owner’s photo, make sure you get all the rights
Minott v. Wichita Water Conditioning, Inc., No. 18-cv-01656-MSK-SKC, 2020 WL 616359 (D. Colo. Feb. 7, 2020) Minott used to own Fluid, which operated a water conditioning business under the trade name Chuck, The Water Man. Fluid made extensive use of … Continue reading
Amicus brief in Booking.com
Joined by a number of able trademark scholars, I filed this amicus brief in Booking.com in support of neither party, arguing that (1) genericness standards need to take into account the risks of overassertion/overprotection, and (2) unfair competition doctrine provides … Continue reading
