Tech Law Advisor on what might be a paid attempt to verbify the A9 trademark. ‘A9′ed’ has a chance but I don’t think ‘A9.com’ed’ will become street slang soon.
When I began practicing trademark law there was no TESS, TARR, eTEAS and no quick way to look at file wrappers. It sucked.
Thank you Trademark Office.
The Trademark Office is now making file wrappers (the trademark application file) available online.
Here’s the link.
It’s pretty impressive.
Excellent article: ‘Deregulating Relevancy in Internet Trademark Law’ by Professor Eric Goldman. A must read in analyzing the sale of keywords.
The Advocate General advises the European Court of Justice as to the proper test in determining the registrability of Nestle’s HAVE A BREAK mark (apart from its registered mark HAVE A BREAK, HAVE A KIT KAT).
Decision here (Case 353/03).
IPKat reaction here.
My friend Jane quoted here.
Seattle University is presenting its Advertising Law Conference April 15. Speakers from, among others, Nike, Microsoft, Nintendo, Hasbro, Expedia, Perkins Coie and Graham Dunn, will discuss corporate speech, spam and ‘stealth advertising.’ I will be participating on a panel on targeted advertising.
Amazon’s A9 search engine is rolling out a visual yellow pages, providing phoos of the busiensses listed. This may have some effect in reducing consumer fraud, but also removes a primary advantage of the Internet, which is that nobody knows you’re a dog.
Interesting article by James Surowiecki in The New Yorker primarily about the Vioxx matter and tort law, but also contains an insight about the branding of pharmaceutical drugs and its unintended consequences.
English translation of French decision regarding Google’s sale of MERIDIEN as keyword to competitors of Meridien Hotel chain.
The decision places importance on Google’s suggestion in its AdWords promotional materials, that the potential advertiser select a keyword more effective than the generic term for the advertised goods or services.
Not work friendly: Fifth Circuit case holding that defendant’s song ‘Back That Azz Up’ does not infringe copyright of plaintiff’s song ‘Back That Ass Up.’ Discussion of proper jury instructions in copyright case and of concept of probative similarity.
Postive Black Talk, Inc. v. Cash Money Records, 03-30625 (5th Cir Dec 17, 2004).