In response to our inquiry re San Diego, Jenn from the Pacific Northwest forwards this to us:
1. Georges at the Cove, La Jolla The view from this restaurant is amazing.
2. Jakes, Del Mar Amazing views of the coastline and the food is outstanding.
3. The Beach House,
Seventh Circuit: U.S. Copyright Law does not preempt Illinois’ Right of Publicity Act. The right to control the commercial exploitation of one’s identity is separate from the right to protect one particular fixation of one’s likeness in, for example, a photograph.
Toney v. L’Oreal, 03-2184 (7th Cir. May 6, 2005).
Answer to the Nike v. Nikepal ‘Test Your Skills’ fact pattern here via TTABlog.
iRobot sues Canadian firm for copyright and patent infringement relating to the Roomba robotic vacuum cleaner. Via Boston Business Journal. First three Laws Of Robotics discussed here.
</p.
Yale’s LV Sidewalk discussed here by LawMeme.
Google aparently went down for about 15 minutes over the weekend and it’s not precisely clear what happened. A spokesman said that Google had trouble with its domain name server.
Would you clear NIKEPAL for ‘Import and export agencies and wholesale distributorships featuring scientific, chemical, pharmaceutical, biotechnology testing instruments and glassware for laboratory uses, electrical instruments, paper products and household products and cooking appliances,’ bearing in mind that the owners of the famous NIKE mark prevailed last year against NIKE and design for various restaurant
A column from eWeek discussing the timetable of UDRP proceedings, using a matter I handled as an example.
I didn’t know there was an Irish boyband named WESTLIFE but the fact that its record label’s application for WESTLIFE was rejected by the EU’s Court of First Instance, because of prior rights in WEST owned by a German cigarette company, has gotten a lot of press coverage.
Pencils down. We asked whether, if you were reviewing a trademark search, whether you would clear SURVIVOR for sunscreen if there was a prior rights holder for SURFVIVOR for identical goods. In this Ninth Circuit decision, the Court affirmed dismissal on summary judgment that plaintiff did not prove that the marks were confusingly similar.