2014 Advertising Fair Use Trademark 
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
JUNE 8, 2024
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. In an April 2023 summary judgment ruling , the plaintiff established that it “possesses the legally protectable, incontestable trademarks TEXAS TAMALE and TEXAS TAMALE COMPANY.” ” Say what?
Erik K Pelton
DECEMBER 20, 2022
The year saw many trademark stories in the news as backlogs continued at the USPTO even while application filing numbers dropped from their all time highs during the two previous years. Here are the biggest trademark stories of 2022 that we have been following at EMP&A. Celebrity trademark messes. Queen of Christmas.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
43(B)log
JULY 21, 2023
but also narrows the issues somewhat; the larger infringement, cybersquatting, and false advertising claims can’t be resolved on summary judgment. On websites, emails, and mailers, LHB uses Axon’s Taser character, stylized word, and design marks, often in proximity to its own marks. But is it a nominative fair use?
IP Tech Blog
MARCH 18, 2022
Intellectual property owners need to add the metaverse to places to watch for possible infringement, specifically, trademark or copyright infringement in the form of NFTs or non-fungible tokens. NFTs are unique tokens based on blockchain technology and used as digital assets. NFTs also may embody or use trademarks.
LexBlog IP
MARCH 18, 2022
Intellectual property owners need to add the metaverse to places to watch for possible infringement, specifically, trademark or copyright infringement in the form of NFTs or non-fungible tokens. NFTs are unique tokens based on blockchain technology and used as digital assets. NFTs also may embody or use trademarks.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
music synchronised in an advertisement) and adaptations (e.g. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected Jeff Koons’ fair use argument ( section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976 ) based on parody ( Rogers v. The sculpture was presented in 2014 by the Centre Pompidou in the retrospective exhibition mentioned above.
43(B)log
DECEMBER 20, 2022
Plaintiffs also alleged infringement of Monbo’s right of publicity, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Lanham Act and related Maryland trademark law. Plaintiffs allegedly used the 12 O’Clock Boyz trademarks since 2001 and registered the marks in 2016. The court, in a careful opinion, rejected all the claims.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
101 
Let's personalize your content