short version: nothing to do immediately regarding existing EUTMs; might want to consider back-up UK filing for new EU TMs.
[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2016/06/BREXIT_BomhardIP-Note_2706-1.pdf”]
S Ct: Text of Kirtsaeng v John Wiley on Awarding Attorney’s Fees
Footnote two is a contender for funniest Supreme Court footnote this term.
Kirtsaeng bought low-cost foreign edition textbooks in Thailand and resold them to students in the U.S. In 2013 the Supreme Court held that Kirtsaeng could invoke the Copyright Act’s “first-sale doctrine,” 17 U.S.C. 109(a), as a defense to the publisher’s
SDNY finds closure on functionality on closure and parties can now move on
[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2016/06/schutte-v-kwik-lok-1.pdf”]
2d Circuit: Jaw Droppingly New Dawn Donuts Analysis of Injunction – Guthrie v ContextMedia
Plaintiff Guthrie operates medical facilities, Defendant ContextMedia provides a digital network for advertiser (read: pharma)-sponsored medical information displayed on screens in doctors’ offices. Plaintiff operates in the Twin Tiers region, which is Southern New York and Northern Pennsylvania. Defendant operates in all 50 states. At the District Court level, Defendant was enjoined from doing business
How Do You Think This One Turned Out?
Plaintiff Guthrie operates medical facilities, Defendant Context Media provides a digital network for advertiser-sponsored medical information displayed on screens in doctors’ offices.
SDNY: NESPRESSO compatible capsules infringing
3 of 3
NESPRESSO capsule trade dress was infringing as well –
this could have been an interesting case if contestedhttps://t.co/Em5LVpy8M1— (((TrademarkBlog))) (@TrademarkBlog) June 9, 2016
2 of 3
Use of 'NESPRESSO-Compatible' for espresso machine capsule held infringing but case was defaulthttps://t.co/Em5LVpy8M1— (((TrademarkBlog))) (@TrademarkBlog) June 9, 2016
1 of 3
NESPRESSO
Fashion Law by Jessica Cardon of Camuto Group
A very good comprehensive intro to copyright and trademark protection of fashion, written by Jessica Elliot of the Camuto Group, for INTA’s Industry Perspectives papers
[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2016/06/Fashion_Law-by-Jessica-Elliot-Cardon-1.pdf”]
Berian Doesn’t Want To Be In Nike’s Shoes But He May Have To Be
Nike had an endorsement contract with Boris Berian, a middle-distance track star who is expected to make the US Olympic team. Nike had a right of first refusal with regard to new agreements. Berian presented an offer from rival footwear manufacturer, New Balance. There is a dispute as to whether Nike matched New Balance’s offer,
Recent UDRPs of Interest
https://t.co/Mp0B5dZur7
Respondent's arguments re RDNH undercut by its criminal conviction#udrphttps://t.co/LYcr0U6soT— TrademarkBlog (@TrademarkBlog) May 30, 2016
Did complainant jump into this FEETFIRST without thinking, or was it 'giving it a shot'? #udrphttps://t.co/lBKIL7EFII
— TrademarkBlog (@TrademarkBlog) May 30, 2016
FAKIR goes without prevailing in #UDRP re https://t.co/UZrEdjoAKQ https://t.co/lXdtCCIvER
— TrademarkBlog (@TrademarkBlog) May 30,
CD Cal: Discussion of Sanctions Against Law Firm / Individual Atty
Sweet People Apparel v Saza Jeans, 14-1143-DMG (CD Cal May 25, 2016). Individual attorneys had been sanctioned under Rule 11/37 for ‘evasive or incomplete discovery’ (discovery docs had been redacted without proper indicia as such). Order of sanctions amended in absence of indication that trial counsel were personally responsible; law firm bears responsibility for