article thumbnail

California Supreme Court reaffirms strict liability for false advertising in Serova

43(B)log

The statements were “commercial advertising meant to sell a product, and generally there ‘can be no constitutional objection to the suppression of commercial messages that do not accurately inform the public.’” Not all marketing of artistic works is noncommercial speech. There was also no copyright preemption.

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (September 13-19)

SpicyIP

Panda and Brothers , granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the Respondents from using the get-up/ artistic work similar to the Petitioner’s registered artistic work for the sale of salt. The Calcutta High Court in Sri Parvathy Saltern Private Ltd. September 13, 2021]. Ishvi Food Private Ltd.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Rogers v Grimaldi doesn't apply to alcohol, but Peaky Blinders still can't get injunction

43(B)log

If we got rid of the bizarre idea that Rogers was about artistic works and correctly labeled it as being about commercial speech, courts would do much better. False advertising/passing off: Same basic problems. Did Mandabach have valid marks? That favored a confusion finding.

article thumbnail

11th Circuit affirms Viacom's Rogers-based win for MTV Floribama Shore

43(B)log

Flora-Bama logo The Flora-Bama has been featured in artistic works by third parties. The title-v-title exception to original-recipe Rogers didn’t apply, because the bar’s name is not the title of an artistic work. Likewise, they submitted no evidence of confusion between any of those works and MTV’s show.

article thumbnail

Free Speech, Chatting About Friends, Kraken/Crackin’ On AI, & Thinking About Fred & Ginger: Generated Content, Amici Curiae, & A Case About Jack Daniels That Dances Around Trademark Issues And Leaves Some Things To Chew On

LexBlog IP

” This appeal presents a conflict between Rogers’ right to protect her celebrated name and the right of others to express themselves freely in their own artistic work. Rogers , 875 F.2d 2d at 996] The Rogers court held, at least as to the dancer’s Lanham Act claim, that the defendant was entitled to summary judgment.

article thumbnail

USC IP year in review, TM/ROP

43(B)log

For about a decade, courts had realized that IIC had gone way too far, and had expanded liability in ways that didn’t protect consumers and facilitated anticompetitive claims about false advertising. Question: is a political newsletter really artistic?

IP 94