Tag Archives: trademark

WIPIP, part 2

H. Brian Holland, We Are All Cyborgs Now: A Cognitive Theory of the Third-Party Doctrine Once upon a time there were categorical protectsion for private papers against search & seizure. Courts then ruled that personal property was no longer categorically … Continue reading

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

WIPIP part one

Works-in-Progress Intellectual Property Colloquium Boston University School of Law Opening Plenary [missed beginning due to travel] Timothy K. Armstrong, Symbols, Systems, and Software as Intellectual Property: Time for CONTU, Part II? Functionality is still a problem. Altai seemed to work … Continue reading

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

Latest additions to my collection

Etsy is a font of interesting objects, including dollhouse miniatures, handmade jewelry, and even soaps (which would make good party favors for IP events, just sayin’).  Transformative works? jewelry for teaching defenses by dollhouse miniatures handbag soaps closeup on Chanel … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

use of P’s jewelry in D’s ad is regular passing off, not reverse passing off

Brighton Collectible, LLC v. Believe Production, Inc., 2017 WL 440255, No. 15-cv-00579 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2017) Brighton sued Believe for infringing Brighton’s copyright in a jewelry design and also engaging in false designation of origin/unfair competition.  In particular, Brighton … Continue reading

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

use of P’s jewelry in D’s ad is regular passing off, not reverse passing off

Brighton Collectible, LLC v. Believe Production, Inc., 2017 WL 440255, No. 15-cv-00579 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2017) Brighton sued Believe for infringing Brighton’s copyright in a jewelry design and also engaging in false designation of origin/unfair competition.  In particular, Brighton … Continue reading

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

Advertising a phone with an unauthorized screenshot of an app doesn’t violate the Lanham Act under Dastar

Appjigger GmbH v. BLU Products, Inc., 2016 WL 4119720, No. 15–22313 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2016) Appjigger makes apps, and has an exclusive license for the WP CLOCK software app, which is available both to end users and also for … Continue reading

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

Political ad isn’t commercial, can’t be basis of Lanham Act claim

Nichols v. Club for Growth Action, No. 16-220, 2017 WL 420111 (D.D.C. Jan. 31, 2017) Club for Growth Action is a political organization that broadcast a 30-second political ad on Wisconsin television and the Internet in September 2015, challenging the … Continue reading

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

Amazon escapes liability for ads & emails touting vendors’ infringing products

Lasoff v. Amazon.com Inc, 2017 WL 372948, No. C16-151 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 26, 2017) Lasoff owns Ingrass, which sells artificial turf and related products.  He sold through Amazon, but in 2013 his sales allegedly began to plummet, both on his … Continue reading

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

Identifying Boundaries in Patent and Trademark Law.

The American University Law Review is proud to present its annual Federal Circuit symposium,  Panel 2: Trademarks First Amendment Freedom of Speech and Trademarks: What Is, and What Should Be, the Relationship Between the Two? Christine Farley, American University Washington … Continue reading

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

National Constitution Center Podcast on Tam

Deborah Gerhardt, Ilya Shapiro,  and I discuss Tam. http://ift.tt/2jRxGz1? The podcast can be found at the National Constitution Center’s website, as well as on iTunes and other platforms. from Blogger http://ift.tt/2jDCued

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment