Legal in Phoenix, liable in Central Islip
UPDATE: All the below is still very relevant, very important and very significant — except as to the final judgment, which has been vacated by... Read more
Tag: Initial Interest Confusion
Best of 2006: Side by side comparison doesn’t decide likelihood of confusion
Originally posted on July 11, 2006. This is an important decision: The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has partially reversed the earlier ruling of the... Read more
Side by side comparison doesn’t decide likelihood of confusion
This is an important decision: The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has partially reversed the earlier ruling of the U.S. District Court for the Southern... Read more
INTA on Initial Interest Confusion
The work of my INTA subcommittee, on an issue raised by me (and followed through on mostly by others): INTA – Initial Interest Confusion September... Read more
That special something that says “infringement”
Paul Alan Levy sends along this heartwarming news about the Jenzabar case: In a ruling this week, a Massachusetts trial judge upheld the free speech rights... Read more
Gucci v. Frontline Processing: Giving credit for infringement where it’s due
[stextbox id=”info”]This is an adaptation of a summary and analysis of the recent decision in Gucci America, Inc. v. Frontline Processing Corp., 2010 WL 2541367... Read more
Second Circuit and the whole of the law on confusion
This is big, but stay calm. Though I hardly can. I took some heat a little while ago for suggesting, contrary to my generally skeptical... Read more
Bag It
Remember Vuitton v. Dooney? It’s over. Reports the Shiny Style blog: A judge ruled in favor of Dooney & Bourke in the trademark dispute involving... Read more
Drive-by infringement
Steve Baird says initial interest confusion is “the real thing” and in the process seeks to “add life” to Professor McCarthy’s famous “evil highway road sign”... Read more
Returning balance to the IP equation
My article, “Trademark, Copyright, and the Internet: Time to Return Balance to Civil Litigation” in the August 31, 2010 edition of the Federalist Society’s Engage magazine is now... Read more
The second time as farce
On the occasion of the S&L Vitamins v. Australian Gold trial, I reposted what I wrote here six months earlier about the first of these... Read more
The law on initial interest confusion: Interestingly confusing
Oh joy, 9th Cir. embraces initial interest confusion again http://t.co/3Zaqg3DuQd Bad ruling over Amazon’s internal search. I’ll blog soon — Eric Goldman (@ericgoldman) July 6,... Read more
Designer Skin v. S&L continued: “S&L had a perfect right to sell this product”
Unfortunately for future defendants in the position of our client, Internet retailer S&L, U.S. District Judge James Teilborg’s decision from the bench in the District... Read more
Aw, shucks
We already covered the Designer Skin v. S&L Vitamins summary judgment decision, and linked to commentators Greg Beck, Bill Patry, Rebecca Tushnet, Eric Goldman and... Read more