2010 Fair Use Marketing Trademark Law 
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
NOVEMBER 11, 2023
Allegedly, Facebook and Instagram refused the takedown demands because the trademark violations weren’t obvious. Second, and more importantly, because the trademark law consequences of getting it wrong are so severe that few services would choose to roll the dice. This ruling highlights the legal risk. Meta Platforms, Inc.
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
OCTOBER 19, 2021
WhenU concluded that trademarks was a dead-end. Nevertheless, because adware often provided poor consumer experiences, adware largely fizzled out by 2010. The court approaches this case like it’s an adware case, but the court never once uses the term. WhenU concluded that copyright was a dead-end. 1-800 Contacts v.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
LexBlog IP
SEPTEMBER 29, 2022
They are marketed through different, yet related, channels of trade (sports and entertainment, which were melded together as ESPN’s original name ). In the US, other sound marks include Law & Order ’s ca-chung chung (as Reg. 1 v OHIM , C‑329/02 P, EU:C:2004:532, paragraph 23).
SpicyIP
DECEMBER 30, 2023
Ujoy Technology and Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha vs Tech Square Engineering Pvt Ltd [Delhi High Court] This year the concept of transborder reputation in trademark law saw two important interpretations from the Delhi High Court. Meticulous Market Research Pvt. Bolt Technology v. First, in Toyota v. Acko General Insurance.
Patently-O
DECEMBER 12, 2021
Missouri’s predominant purpose test, which inquires into whether the predominant purpose of using the famous person’s name or identity is to exploit its commercial value; or whether “the predominant purpose of the product is to make an expressive comment on or about a celebrity.” [15] 10] In re Hoefflin , 2010 WL 5191373, *1. [11]
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
92 
Let's personalize your content