Remove Copying Remove Definition Remove False Advertising Remove Social Media
article thumbnail

copying/explicit references let Roblox proceed with dubious (c) claim; Lego should be watching

43(B)log

Wowwee sells a line of dolls called “My Avastars,” which plaintiffs allege were “copied directly from Roblox’s Classic Avatars.” Looking at the side by side pictures in the complaint, this is a bit hard to swallow, but the evidence of copying/references to Roblox clearly bleed over from the TM side.

Copying 94
article thumbnail

claims based on false movie trailer promise of Ana De Armas's presence can proceed

43(B)log

Although expressing some skepticism, the court found that they stated a valid false advertising claim. Thus, Universal argued that the alleged misrepresentation was too vague and non-specific to definitely represent that viewers would see De Armas or her segment in the movie. But explicit misstatements aren’t required.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

IPSC Breakout Session #1

43(B)log

So too w/false advertising. Assumptions skipped over in TM/false advertising analysis.] That’s where disclosure rules need the most attention: definition and relation to what courts are going to do with the registration. Keep up with the culture by considering social media. It’s market definition.

article thumbnail

WIPIP: Innovation Theory & TM

43(B)log

Copying may be directly costless to the knowledge creator, but knowledge transfer is not, and who is initiating may affect what’s going on here: knowledge transfer encodes voluntariness which fits with Cicero but not with a lot of the copying to which people object today. I don’t think that’s true either. 3) Functionality.

article thumbnail

A Look Back at India’s Top IP Developments of 2023

SpicyIP

The Court held that “diagnostic” under Section 3(i) should neither be construed narrowly, limited to only in-vivo or definitive diagnosis, nor broadly to include any process “relating to” diagnosis. The central issue here was whether Section 3(i) is restricted to only in vivo tests practices on the human body. HULM Entertainment v.

IP 124