Extraterritorial Application

Hanesbrands v Keds, LLC and SR Holdings, 1:20-cv-11354-IT (D Mass May 21, 2021)

Hanes, successor to Champion, has been licensing the CHAMPION brand in relation to shoes, from Keds, for decades.  Keds has been selling KEDS CHAMPION in the U.S,. and several other jurisdictions. Hanes was free to use in non-U.S. jurisdictions where

Somewhat unusual use of the in rem provisions of ACPA. Chinese plaintiff alleges that a John Doe who also resides in China, has converted multiple domain names for (their) own use. Alleges cyber-squatting, tortious interference and conversion.

jin v 001hh com memo.pdf

var docstoc_docid=’172346200′; var docstoc_title=’jin v 001hh com memo.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’jin v 001hh com

North American sub of Software AG enters into contract with US corporation and its Brazilian agent to provide support in Brazil for Software AG’s Brazilian customers. There was a dispute and the contract was terminated, leaving the Brazilian agent exposed in its support commitments. The Brazilian agent then made statements in Brazil to its customers

43(B)log: “Globetrotting: Foreign B-Ball Manufacturer Not Liable For Failure To Mark Origin“:
“Molten advertised its “Dual Cushion Technology” as its own innovation, and it was featured as a proprietary design created by Molten in FIBA Assist Magazine, “[t]echnology that only Molten can create.” Amazon.com labels Molten balls as featuring “Innovative Molten Dual Cushion

The TTAB (in a citable decision) holds that a Canadian entity did not use its mark in foreign commerce with the U.S. despite spillover advertising into the U.S. and some sales to U.S. customers. In so doing, the TTAB declined to apply the wide definition of ‘foreign trade’ in the Monte Carlo case.