The IP Law Blog

JANUARY 19, 2023

In this case, the Supreme Court will decide whether the Andy Warhol Foundation made fair use of a photo of the late artist Prince. In short, the matter at issue will address when a work is sufficiently transformative to qualify for fair use protection under the Copyright Act. Hetronic International.

Copyright 97

Copyright Trademark Fair Use Contracts 97

Intellectual Property Law Blog

JUNE 16, 2023

2 on your Tennessee carpet” tarnishes the Jack Daniels trademark. The District Court also held that the fair use exclusion for parodies under the Lanham Act’s dilution provision did not apply where the use at issue does not serve as “a designation of source for the [alleged diluter’s] own goods.” 1125(c)(3)(A).

Fair Use 130

Fair Use Trademark Cease and Desist Designs 130

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 1, 2023

Supreme Court in June issued a decision involving trademark law. Jack Daniel’s brought trademark infringement claims against VIP Products, a company that produces a “Bad Spaniels” line of dog toys. The Court reasoned that the toys themselves were products, rather than artistic works.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Artistic Work Trademark Trademark Law 40

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 19, 2023

In this case, the Supreme Court will decide whether the Andy Warhol Foundation made fair use of a photo of the late artist Prince. In short, the matter at issue will address when a work is sufficiently transformative to qualify for fair use protection under the Copyright Act. Hetronic International.

Copyright 52

Copyright Trademark Fair Use Contracts 52

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 19, 2022

Summary of current treatment: Although courts have often referred to “expressive” or “artistic” works as shorthand for the scope of Rogers, they have applied it to speech that quali?es Thus, it may not even be descriptive fair use to use the name of the religion from which the dissenters have parted.

Trademark Law 72

Trademark Law Trademark Art Branding 72

LexBlog IP

JUNE 16, 2023

2 on your Tennessee carpet” tarnishes the Jack Daniels trademark. The District Court also held that the fair use exclusion for parodies under the Lanham Act’s dilution provision did not apply where the use at issue does not serve as “a designation of source for the [alleged diluter’s] own goods.”

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Cease and Desist Trademark Designs 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 16, 2023

2 on your Tennessee carpet” tarnishes the Jack Daniels trademark. The District Court also held that the fair use exclusion for parodies under the Lanham Act’s dilution provision did not apply where the use at issue does not serve as “a designation of source for the [alleged diluter’s] own goods.”

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Cease and Desist Trademark Designs 52