This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In addition to his proclaimed status a highly accomplished artist and photographer, Mr. Davis appears to be an accomplished, or at least frequent, litigator. According to Justia.com, he has filed 23 copyright infringement suits across the country since 2017.
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. ” That prompted this litigation. CV H-17-1068, 2017 WL 2957912, at *8 (S.D. ” UGH. See Tempur-Pedic N. Mattress Firm, Inc. ,
30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash technology, but false patent marking counterclaims should survive. 1, 2017 to Apr. 11, 2023 (claiming that various products were “patented”).
14, 2022) Once in a blue moon, a false advertising-based antitrust claim survives a motion to dismiss in a circuit that imposes a list of excessive requirements on such claims. Consumers and advertisers adequately alleged that Facebook has monopoly power in social network/social media (consumers) and social advertising markets.
Jason Fyk’s recent litigation campaign reminds me of the classic story Moby Dick, with Fyk in the Captain Ahab role and Section 230 as his white whale. Fyk claims Facebook retaliated against him because he didn’t advertise enough. The Netflix documentary of his story will be called “Moby Fyk.” Freedom Def.
To my knowledge, the only litigated case that resulted in a 512(f) win was Online Policy Group v. The 512(f) plaintiff wins after 3 years of litigation and a bench trial. Amazon is a key player in this litigation, but the court doesn’t address its responsibility at all. A New 512(f) Plaintiff Win! So what did it win?
My roundup of the top Internet Law developments of 2023: 10) California court bans targeted advertising (?). Regulators have sought to suppress online targeted advertising for years, with only minimal success. In turn, advertisers have fled Twitter. Then, in Liapes v. seriously, are you still posting THERE???)
LaBossiere comes out swinging, reminding the court that after eight years of Department of Justice litigation, a massive judgment against DISH put the company into financial turmoil. Since 2017, Dish has been struggling to keep its stock price up from its 2015 and 2017 peaks,” LaBossiere’s answer begins.
Shingle Savers counterclaimed, alleging, among other things, false advertising under the Lanham Act and violation of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Lanham Act/ODTPA claims: First, the court declined to hold that Rule 9(b) applied to Lanham Act false advertising claims, which don’t require fraud.
After 3+ yrs of litigation, court awards Bell $200 in statutory damages–but actually $0 due to a related settlement. This is a preview of the future of CCB litigation…CAN’T WAIT! in February 2017. 2017 WL 11665339 (SDNY Feb. Wilmont Storage Services, LLC , No. 19-55882 (9th Cir. 9, 2021). Brnovich , No.
Sanderson continues to use and defend the use of antibiotics, but advertised its chicken products as “100% Natural” and ran advertisements stating that there were “[n]o antibiotics to worry about here.” Nor were activities after suit was filed in June 2017, such as expending resources on the litigation and litigation publicity.
In 2017, Elsevier won a court case against LibGen and Sci-Hub in a New York federal court, which awarded the publisher $15 million in damages. “This damages award is a fraction of what it could be if this case were litigated and the full scope of Defendants’ infringement revealed,” the publishers note.
7, 2021) The underlying litigation involves class actions against coffee distributors, wholesalers, and retailers arising out of the allegedly misleading use of the name “Kona.” Relatedly, it claimed that neither “Kona” nor “Kona Coffee” or “Kona Café” are “used to attract attention” in advertising. Travelers Indemnity Co.
But much like George Washington’s army, even though Flo & Eddie lost many individual battles, they ultimately won the war, as their quixotic litigation campaign prompted Congress to grant protection to pre-1972 sound recordings equivalent to that provided to newer sound recordings under federal copyright law. 3d 14 (2d Cir.
Image Sources: Shutterstock] Before 2017, trademarks in India were declared well-known based on court judgements and decisions of tribunals. However, the Trademark Rules of 2017 introduced a formal application process under Rule 124 which allowed trademark owners to request for a well-known status from the Registrar of the Trademarks.
. “NAGRA has supported law enforcement for this kind of operations for more than two decades and has a worldwide reach for these types of operations,” said Pascal Métral, VP of legal affairs and head of anti-piracy intelligence, investigations and litigation for Nagra. Nagra’s timing was spot on.
After giving an excellent summary of Hatch-Waxman Act litigation, the Federal Circuit recounted the history of the action: Celgene filed its first case in May 2017. The defendants-appellees moved to dismiss for improper venue and failure to state a claim in August 2017. Mylan Pharmaceutics Inc.,
Cheng is based in Fish’s New York office, where she focuses her practice on trademark, trade dress, unfair competition, and copyright litigation. MIP ’s independent research is based on a weighted system of peer and client feedback, combined with a review of information obtained from surveys conducted with law firms and their clients.
The plaintiff has made various efforts to make their trademark famous like advertising and has hosted various sports and cultural events including international cricket matches. The plaintiff by these advertisements has gained a big market all over the world. 259 of 2017 – The Hon’ble High Court of Madras – [link]. [1]
sought an interim injunction against Hindustan Coco-Cola for infringement of their copyright on ‘Yeh Dil Maange More’ which was used by Hindustan Coco-Cola as ‘Kyo Dil Maange No More’ in their advertisement. Hindustan Coca Cola Ltd, wherein the Pepsi Co. s commercial. Vipul Amrutlal Shah (2009) and MRF Limited v.
That’s what Chisholm Trail High School’s softball team and color guard did in 2017, on Twitter, to under 1000 followers, crediting Bell. Attorney’s fees were thus an appropriate deterrent, both with respect to Bell and other copyright holders who might consider a similar business model of litigation.”
Further, YouTube disabled access to Season 25 of Skibidi Toilet in response to Next Level’s DCMA Takedown Notice, which caused Invisible Narratives to lose streaming revenue from advertising placement.” Benjamin * How Have Section 512(f) Cases Fared Since 2017? Spoiler: Not Well) * Another Section 512(f) Case FailsISE v.
Sadly, the EU trade mark system is entirely lacking in an effective mechanism for putting a quick stop to pointless litigation, so it took several years and decisions of the EUIPO, the EUIPO Board of Appeal and finally the EU General Court to put this one to bed (in theory there could be an appeal to the CJEU, but I think probably not).
Johnson Enterprises bought a copy of the P&P game, sent samples to a Chinese manufacturer, and began selling an almost identical version of P&P’s game that it called “Tailgating Pros White Connect 4” in October 2017. The Court found it significant that the two games are identical except for the logs displayed on the product.
They alleged violation of California’s FAL and UCL, false advertising under the Lanham Act, trade libel, and negligence. The complaint was filed mid-2021, and the injuries allegedly began in mid-2017, which was outside the statute of limitations for everything but the UCL. The majority view [among federal courts; I bet the Cal. .…
Vivian Cheng focuses her practice on trademark and copyright litigation and also counsels clients on a broad range of issues relating to trademark, trade dress, and copyright protection and enforcement, unfair competition, and false advertising. Will Freeman focuses his practice on patent litigation in U.S. He received his J.D.
set of proceedings, namely: The word marks "easylife" and "Easylife" in class 35, including for advertising and marketing services (the Easylife Word Marks); and The following stylised mark (the Easylife Stylised Mark), also registered in class 35 (together, the Easylife Marks): Both sides attacked the other's trade marks.
The Digital Economy Act 2017 was the government’s attempt at creating a better, safer internet for citizens in the UK. ” It’s also worth mentioning that Hatton and Berkeley, a business entity that is also involved in this settlement project, previously advertised the usefulness of an LLP structure (i.e
In 2017, Life Spine entered into various agreements with Aegis by which Aegis would sell and distribute ProLift devices while maintaining as confidential all proprietary information related to the devices. Litigation continued for years, with Aegis raising unsuccessful counterclaims.
30, 2022) Pegasystems alleged that defendants, which compete with it in the business process management (BPM) software field, engaged in false advertising and commercial disparagement in an online report that portrayed Pegasystems unfavorably. 19-11461-PBS, 2022 WL 4630231, F.Supp.3d Previous discussion.) Chapter 93A).
In June 2017, Owen sent a letter by e-mail to several representatives of Blue Mountain customers, informing them that he had started Silvermark. In 2017, Blue Mountain filed a lawsuit against Owen, alleging that Owen had breached his non-solicitation agreement by sending these letters to Blue Mountain’s customers. Silvermark).
In so ruling, the Court found that Defendants’ affirmative defenses of laches and acquiescence failed as a matter of law because (1) they were based on an alleged 2017 assignment of the EMERSON QUIET KOOL trademark from American Ductless AC Corp. American Ductless”) to Defendant Emerson Quiet Kool Co.
The plaintiffs alleged that Instagram encouraged the embedding of photos in order to drive up advertising revenue. However, the general acceptance of the server test began to show signs of erosion beginning with 2017 with Goldman v. In September, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breitbart News Network LLC in which U.S.
In 2017, Life Spine entered into various agreements with Aegis by which Aegis would sell and distribute ProLift devices while maintaining as confidential all proprietary information related to the devices. Litigation continued for years, with Aegis raising unsuccessful counterclaims.
1055/DELNP/2009 for the invention –“Process Device with Density Measurement” and the subsequent rejection order (dt July 7, 2017) passed by the Controller. Sidenote: We’ll put out an in-depth assessment of the information regarding IPD’s performance, as highlighted in this report, in an upcoming post.]
The petitioner through the simple means of regular and massive use and advertising of its FEVIKWIK trademark already holding a strong market with a design not changed since 1987, argued that it had a right to the recognition of goodwill in such a name. Poma-Ex Products, 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 7470. [2] The Trade Marks Act, 1999. [1]
But Industria does not advertise or sell its Zenú or Ranchera products in the United States and there are no market surveys specific to the United States for Zenú or Ranchera. Advertisements made for Latinfood Zenú products used the phrase “una deliciosa tradición,” which translates to “a delicious tradition.”
The 2017 label also references the “coast” and includes a map of Oregon with leaves denoting the locations of the Willamette, Umpqua, and Rogue Valleys. the 2017 reads “ACAMPO, CA • CONTAINS SULFITES.” The labels describe the wine at issue here as an “Oregon Pinot Noir.” It contains the phrase “Purely Oregon, Always Coastal.”
You may remember from a previous blog post that Coca Cola had design protection of the bottle shape available as an interim measure while they built associations to the bottle shape through their advertising. In practice, there is a constant interplay between use of identifiers and ownership of them.
The company has brought over 300 cases since 2017, often using copyrighted product images as a technical hook to shut down undesired resellers who advertise its products at below retail prices. NOCO manufactures and sells car battery accessories. It also files lawsuits—lots of them. d/b/a Topdon is entirely next level. Gregorini v.
In re: Elysium Health-ChromaDex Litigation, No. Elysium’s expert, Sowers, tested the allegation that ChromaDex advertising deceived customers into believing that the FDA reviewed ChromaDex’s product, Tru Niagen, for efficacy. Respondents were never shown an advertising statement conveying the control message.”
During the summer of 2017, several of the world’s largest entertainment industry companies teamed up to create a new anti-piracy coalition. ” “Having targeted more than 200 online intermediaries this way, it also allows us to identify patterns of piracy friendly intermediaries across the globe,” van Voorn notes.
easyGroup Ltd v Nuclei Ltd [2022] EWHC 901 (Ch) (April 2022) Serial trade mark litigant easyGroup, the vehicle for Sir Stelios to seek to monopolise the word “easy” for travel and just about everything else, received some comeuppance before Mrs Justice Bacon. They were so struck out. I wonder if it will be appealed? IPKat here.
2017), without noting that it had been rejected by the Seventh Circuit in Bell v. However, “All Butter” was ambiguous in context—it was obvious that the product was not a stick of butter, but a cake—and it wasn’t enough to allege that reasonable consumers would expect from the label that there wouldn’t be non-butter shortening. 3d 910 (N.D.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content