Facebook refuses to take down allegedly infringing “Confidence Empire” site[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2020/10/connecticut-confidence-v-facebook-2.pdf” download=”all”]
I think maybe there’s something really wrong with trademark law that this suit can be brought and can withstand a motion for summary judgment.[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2020/10/j-b-weld-gorilla-trade-dress-circuit-decision-1.pdf” download=”all”]
Ezxaki Glico v Lotte, 19-2010, Third Circuit, Oct 8, 2020
Plaintiff leaves parts of its thin cookie sticks uncoated by chocolate, so that you can hold it without getting chocolate on your fingers. The sticks are thin, so that you can have a bunch in the pack to share. Trade dress held to be functional.…
Strike 3 Holdings owns copyrights in various adult films. It files a lot of lawsuits against alleged downloaders of pirated copies of its movies. There is apparently an industry of law firms that will defend people sued by Strike 3.
Also see Artistic Relevance
Unauthorized Harley dealer using HOG logo
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
Cards Against Humanity LLC v. Vampire Squid Cards, LLC, Opp’n 91225576, 2019 WL 1491525 (TTAB Feb 289, 2019) (CRABS ADJUST…
Use in Commerce[embeddoc url=”https://www.schwimmerlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/833/2020/09/utah-lighthouse-ministry-10th-circuit-1.pdf” download=”all”]
“Plaintiffs, twelve record companies, filed suit against defendant alleging claims for five separate violations of the Copyright Act. Plaintiffs are Delaware corporations, with eight having their principal place of business in New York, three in California, and one in Florida. Defendant…
Plaintiff Curtis James Jackson III, the hip-hop recording artist known as 50 Cent, appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for Defendant William Leonard Roberts II, the hip-hop recording artist known as Rick Ross, on the grounds that Jackson’s claim of violation of the Connecticut common law right of publicity is preempted…
Defendant carried Plaintiff’s product in its catalog. At some point it dropped Plaintiff’s product, substituted its own, and kept some of Plaintiff’s ad copy. Plaintiff argues that the removal of its name constituted removal of CMI for purposes of the DMCA.
Held: An author’s name can function as CMI (however the court didn’t give examples).