Tag Archives: trademark

TMSR, part 2

Session 2:  Defining Markets: Doctrinal Settings for Market Analysis in Trademark Law Trademark law clearly already undertakes market definition in the analysis of genericism and also for functionality. Are current approaches adequate? Are markets defined the same way, through the … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Eleventh Trademark Scholars Roundtable: Defining Marks and Markets

Session 1:  The Process for Defining Marks (Registered, Unregistered) What are the different ways to define marks? What are/should be our goals in defining marks? What are the costs of permitting fuzzy definition? Are there costs to  imposing  strict requirements … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Different meaning of Fizzkids and Wizkids defeats infringement claim even for similar products

Wizkids/NECA, LLC v. TIII Ventures, LLC, No. 17-CV-2400 (RA), 2019 WL 1454666 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2019) TIII sells “soda-can-themed toys, specifically, vinyl characters that are sold in packaging resembling a soda can.” The “Fizzkids” are called “Cranked Cola,” “Bone Crusher … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Bad argument of the day: potential registration should count as (R) because opposer is accused infringer

Herman Miller, Inc. v. Blumenthal Distributing, Inc., 2019 WL 1416472, No. LA CV17-04279 JAK (SPx) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2019) Lots of stuff going on here.  Herman Miller sued Blumenthal for infringing on the trade dress of one of its … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Amazon case shows profound difference between DMCA safe harbor & 230 immunity

Kangaroo Mfg. Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc., No. CV-17-01806-PHX-SPL, 2019 WL 1280945 (D. Ariz. Mar. 20, 2019) The Amazon Chronicles often asks “what is Amazon?”  An interesting question to build a law school course around might be “what can Amazon do?”  … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

survey isn’t evidence of actual deception, court says in First Amendment case w/TM relevance

Express Oil Change, L.L.C v. Mississippi Board of Licensure for Professional Engineers & Surveyors, No. 18-60144 (5th Cir. Feb. 19, 2019) Just as a matter of client advocacy, it is time for these First Amendment cases about the government’s near-inability … Continue reading

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

Star Trekkin’ across the universe of fair use

I like Star Trek better than Dr. Seuss, ok? Dr. Seuss Enters., L.P. v. ComicMix LLC, No. 16-CV-2779 JLS (BGS) (S.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2019) DSE owns the copyrights to the works of Theodor S. Geisel, better known as Dr. … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

court, while uncomfy with some Amazon techniques, declines to grant PI

Comphy Co. v. Amazon.com, Inc., NO. C18-1460RSM (W.D. Wash. Mar. 12, 2019) The Comphy Company markets itself as a luxury company, historically supplying its linens to luxury spas. Ultimately, Plaintiff decided to start retailing its products online through its own … Continue reading

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

unauthorized use of model’s photo for strip club wasn’t false advertising or endorsement

Edmondson v. 2001 Live, Inc., 2019 WL 670201, No. 16-cv-03243-T-17AEP (M.D. Fla. Jan. 15, 2019) Edmondson, a model and public figure, sued for the alleged commercial misappropriation of her image used on 2001 Live’s social media account promoting its “gentleman’s” … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

sales show format and timing are functional, court finds

VBS Distribution, Inc. v. Nutrivita Laboratories, Inc., No. SACV 16-01553-CJC(DFM), 2018 WL 5274172 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 10, 2018) The parties compete in the market for nutritional supplements and television programs. VBS sued for Lanham Act and California state unfair competition … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment