Tag Archives: trademark

Alleged Amazon shenanigans constitute use in commerce and commercial advertising/promotion

Posted on March 9, 2016 by rtushnet

Jae Enterprises, Inc. v. OxGord Inc., 2016 WL 865328, No. 15-CV-228 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 2, 2016)   Jae sells aftermarket automobile accessories under the mark Eagle Flight and designs. Jae entered into a distribution agreement with defendants, who resold the … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

My forthcoming article on 2(a) and the First Amendment

Posted on March 9, 2016 by rtushnet

Rebecca Tushnet, The First Amendment Walks into a Bar: Trademark Registration and Free Speech, Notre Dame Law Review (forthcoming)  This Essay analyzes the First Amendment arguments against §2(a)’s disparagement bar with reference to the consequences of any invalidation on the … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Buddy, can you spare a TRO? No injunction for overlapping use of “big” and “hunting”

Posted on March 8, 2016 by rtushnet

Enerco Group, Inc. v. Deutsch, No. 16CV213, 2016 WL 852572 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 3, 2016)   Enerco sued Deutsch for false advertising and trademark infringement.  Enerco makes portable propane heaters called “Buddy Heaters,” used by outdoorsmen and fishermen in enclosures … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Land o’ (non)confusion: no dilution or reverse confusion with dissimilar goods

Posted on March 4, 2016 by rtushnet

Hugunin v. Land O’ Lakes, Inc., No. 15-2815 (7th Cir. Mar. 1, 2016)   This opinion reflects what you might call Judge Posner’s trademark mix of good sense and arrogance/lack of reasons enabling one to formulate an actual rule for … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Trademark defendant wins rare unclean hands defense to injunction

Posted on March 3, 2016 by rtushnet

Cochran Firm, P.C. v. Cochran Firm Los Angeles LLP, — Fed.Appx. —, 2016 WL 770129, No. 15–55816 (9th Cir. Feb. 29, 2016)   A rare unclean hands win for a trademark defendant!  The Cochran Firm appealed the district court’s order … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

WIPIP Session 4: Design

Posted on February 20, 2016 by rtushnet

Session 4: IP, Design, User Experience   Sarah Burstein, Reviving Ornamentality: Fed. Cir. killed ornamentality in design; right now it means nothing other than Morton-Norwich nonfunctionality. She thinks we should bring it back.  Two aspects: (1) “matter of concern” in … Continue reading →

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

WIPIP Session 3: Trademark again

Posted on February 20, 2016 by rtushnet

Session 3 Trademark 2   Irene Calboli & Dan Hunter, Trademark Proliferation: Lots of marks—Louboutin soles; motion of Lamborghini doors; etc.  Why so many?  Very broad definition of what can be protected as a mark + ill-interpreted concept of distinctiveness.  … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

IPSC Session 2: Trademark 1

Posted on February 19, 2016 by rtushnet

Trademark 1   Paul Heald, Testing Theories of Tarnishment in Trademark and Copyright Law   Tarnishment should be treated like false advertising: you should have to prove some (likely) damage to your TM to win, rather than presumptions.  Tarnishment is … Continue reading →

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

New article forthcoming on trademark registration

Posted on February 19, 2016 by rtushnet

New article:  Registering Disagreement: Registration in Modern American Trademark Law, 130 Harvard L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016) Abstract: Trademark scholars widely agree that our current system for evaluating what rights a trademark owner should have over others’ uses of their (or … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Uber and out: court grants limited but still tricky injunction against Uber

Posted on February 18, 2016 by rtushnet

Uber Promotions, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 15-cv-206 (N.D. Fla. Feb. 16, 2016)   This is a hardcore test of how you feel about consumer protection as the sole legitimate aim of trademark law.  Uber Technologies (Tech) rolled into … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment