Tanning Lotion – LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

Designer Skin v. S&L continued: “S&L had a perfect right to sell this product”

Posted on November 3, 2019 by Ron Coleman

Originally posted 2013-09-18 11:43:43. Republished by Blog Post PromoterUnfortunately for future defendants in the position of our client, Internet retailer S&L, U.S. District Judge James […]

Distribution systems

S&L v. Australian Gold: You, the Jury

Posted on March 15, 2019 by Ron Coleman

Originally posted 2009-01-08 21:34:29. Republished by Blog Post PromoterHere’s S&L Vitamin’s Trial Brief for the trial scheduled for next week in the above-entitled cause. (Or […]

Internet Law, Trademarks and trademark law

Aw, shucks

Posted on March 5, 2019 by Ron Coleman

Originally posted 2015-07-25 23:11:08. Republished by Blog Post PromoterWe already covered the Designer Skin v. S&L Vitamins summary judgment decision, and linked to commentators Greg […]

Diversion

Legal in Phoenix, liable in Central Islip

Posted on March 9, 2016 by Ron Coleman

Originally posted 2014-12-31 08:20:34. Republished by Blog Post PromoterUPDATE: All the below is still very relevant, very important and very significant — except as to […]

Diversion

Best of 2008: “Designer Skin v. S&L Continued: ‘S&L had a perfect right to sell this product'” (July)

Posted on December 29, 2008 by Ron Coleman

This was first posted on July 18th: Unfortunately for future defendants in the position of our client, Internet retailer S&L, U.S. District Judge James Teilborg’s […]

Brand Management and Branding, Copyright Law, Internet Law, Trademarks and trademark law

Online retailing and initial interest confusion

Posted on May 21, 2008 by Ron Coleman

We reported earlier on a related case in this area implicating the use of trademarks to sell merchandise online via “unauthorized distributors.” A new decision […]

Trademarks and trademark law