-
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: trademark
allegations of copied instructions lead to finding of noninfringement and possible 512(f) violation
MFB Fertility, Inc. v. Action Care Mobile Veterinary Clinic, LLC, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2024 WL 1719347, No. 23 cv 3854 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 22, 2024) MFB sued Action Care for copyright and trademark infringement; Action Care counterclaimed for misrepresentation under … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged copyright, defamation, dmca, tortious interference, trademark
Leave a comment
My latest acquisition
They’re even in my size! Heavy, but not as hard to walk in as I feared. from Blogger http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2024/11/my-latest-acquisition.html
when weak TM claims do better than seemingly strong false advertising claims
Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technol. Int’l, 2024 WL 4553279, — F.Supp.3d —-, No. 1:18-cv-05385-SDG (N.D. Ga. May 20, 2024) Note: A jury found Kaijet liable for design patent and copyright infringement after this opinion, but rejected the TM claims, which … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged copyright, design patent, false advertising, trademark
Leave a comment
associating two differently named products can’t cause dilution, which requires similar marks
In re Soclean, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., No. 22-mc-152, MDL No. 3021, 2024 WL 4444819 (W.D. Pa. Oct. 8, 2024) Previous discussion of MDL. As previously noted, SoClean is a dominant player in the market for … Continue reading
Another API (c) case with false advertising and contract claims too
Trackman, Inc. v. GSP Golf AB, 2024 WL 4276497, No. 23 Civ. 598 (NRB) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2024) Trackman makes the golf simulator game Perfect Golf, which offers users the ability to virtually play some of the most famous golf … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged contracts, copyright, dastar, false advertising, preemption, trademark
Leave a comment
For-profit company can republish ASTM standards incorporated by reference into law
Am. Soc. for Testing & Materials v. UpCodes, Inc., No. 24-1895 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 2, 2024) ASTM, which produces technical standards, sued UpCodes for providing free online access to unauthorized copies of ten ASTM standards, all of which have been … Continue reading
Copyright preemption in trade dress claims?
Scotts Company LLC v. SBM Life Science Corp., — F.Supp.3d —-, No. 2:23-cv-1541, 2024 WL 4217446 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 18, 2024) Scotts makes consumer lawn, garden, pesticide, and insecticide products, including under the “ORTHO” brand. Scotts alleged rights in its … Continue reading
Organic search results aren’t TM “use”
Alsa Refinish LLC v. Walmart Inc., 2024 WL 3914512, No. 2:23-cv-08536-SVW-MAR (C.D. Cal. Jul. 31, 2024) In 2024, people are still bringing keyword advertising cases. Walmart wins summary judgment. Alsa sells paint, including chrome paint, and claims common-law rights in … Continue reading
6th Circuit applies JDI to political speech, but holds that disclaimers avoid confusion
Libertarian National Committee, Inc. v. Saliba, No. 23-1856 (6th Cir. Aug. 28, 2024) Dissenting members of the Libertarian Party of Michigan maintain that they are the true Michigan affiliate. The Libertarian National Committee sued and the district court enjoined them … Continue reading
Court accepts survey with disclaimer control that causes 38% confusion
Another ruling in the PNC v. Plaid case: PNC Financial Services Gp. v. Plaid Inc., 2024 WL 3691607, No. 2:20-cv-1977 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 7, 2024) Daubert motions for this case. I’ll only discuss the stuff I find interesting. Kivetz … Continue reading