17
Apr/18

ExxonMobil Moves To Dissolve 1967 Injunction Against use of ESSO Trademark


ExxonMobil moves to dissolve an injunction from 1967 enjoining it from using the mark ESSO in several southern states. Seems to be too much background to get into during working hours. Here’s some.



3
Apr/18

Alibaba v AlibabaCoin (for an ICO)


TRO signed by use of ALIBABACOIN for Dubai-based ICO venture. Memo of law below.

News coverage here



3
Apr/18

Text of Decision in SDNY Cybersquatting Gripe Site case: McAllister Olivarius v McAllisterOlivariusTruth.com


Law firm McAllister Olivarius sues a client for unpaid bills. Client registers the domain name McallisterOlivariusTruth.com. Law firm sues for cybersquatting. Client moves to dismiss. Motion to dismiss denied.



3
Apr/18

Blockchain Nation v Blockchain Nation




29
Mar/18

NY Court Of Appeals: Modern Beach-Going Young Woman Not Identifiable As Lindsay Lohan


Lohan v Take-Two Interactive:

Lindsay Lohan’s New York right of publicity suit against the publishers of Grand Theft Auto, arising from use of avatar Lohan asserted was a ‘portrait’ of her, dismissed by NY Court of Appeals:

“.. . we conclude that the amended complaint was properly dismissed because the
artistic renderings are indistinct, satirical representations of the style, look, and persona of
a modern, beach-going young woman that are not reasonably identifiable as plaintiff . . .”

lower court decision here.



29
Mar/18

D NJ: No Personal Jurisdiction Over Hallmark Cards in New Jersey


Appeal of TTAB inter partes decision to district court: Neither general nor specific jurisdiction over Hallmark Cards in New Jersey.



28
Mar/18

Viacom v Hearrt re Paw Patrol Characters




21
Mar/18

Appeal Certified in Goldman v Breitbart (Tom Brady embedded tweet case)


Interlocutory appeal certified in Goldman v Breitbart (Tom Brady embedded link case), thus assuring prompt resolution of knotty legal problem.



19
Mar/18

Match v Bumble re TINDER


the history of swiping left and swiping right detailed.



16
Mar/18

9 Cir: Ventura Content v Motherless, Inc. – DMCA Safe Harbor


Justia’s summary:

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment for defendants and its order denying attorneys’ fees in a copyright case alleging infringement of pornographic content. The panel held that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s safe harbor applied to defendants because the material at issue was stored at the direction of the users and defendants did not have actual or apparent knowledge that the clips were infringing. Furthermore, defendants expeditiously removed the infringing material once they received actual or red flag notice of the infringement, they did not receive financial benefit, and they had a policy to exclude repeat infringers. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion in not exercising supplemental jurisdiction over a California state law claim, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying an award of attorneys’ fees to defendants.