Search for: "Ron Lanham"
Results 1 - 20
of 48
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2012, 8:20 am
By Eric Goldman Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:48 pm
Representative Fritz Lanham, who served from 1919 to 1947. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 4:56 pm
This one has a twist: Ron Paul is suing YouTuber NHLiberty4Paul over an anti-Jon Huntsman video posted as a reason to vote for Paul, alleging (1) false advertising under the Lanham Act, (2) false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, and (3) defamation (the theory being that it associates Paul with repugnant opinions). [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 9:43 am
Jan. 31, 2017)Club for Growth Action is a political organization that broadcast a 30-second political ad on Wisconsin television and the Internet in September 2015, challenging the record of former-Senator Russ Feingold, who was then running for re-election against Ron Johnson. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 5:31 pm
(Eugene Volokh) The opinion (Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 8:47 am
Ron, I had envisioned writing a very different post about the Supreme Court’s long-anticipated decision in Tam, you, your team, and Mr. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 3:45 am
In an intriguing afternoon session, friends and fellow bloggers Ron Coleman and Steve Baird, along with Jesse Witten and the USPTO's Cynthia Lynch, will focus on "an overview of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act as well as the procedures for determining if a trademark is disparaging. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 3:32 am
In an intriguing afternoon session, fellow blogger Ron Coleman, my friend Steve Baird, Jesse Witten, and the USPTO's Cynthia Lynch will focus on "an overview of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act as well as the procedures for determining if a trademark is disparaging. [read post]
23 Jul 2007, 5:10 am
The court concluded that the Lanham Act cannot be read to afford protection to a foreign mark under the "famous marks" doctrine. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 1:04 am
From my perspective, scandal aside, the title of Ron’s series is a misnomer, since the evidence of record in Harjo and Blackhorse showed that the R-Word was improperly granted registration in the first place, so I’m thinking, it looks far more like a windfall to the team than a taking. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 10:58 am
Ron Coleman and his team at Archer Greiner are representing Tam in the case. = = = = = = Mandamus action also requires a substantial harm caused by the delay. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 1:19 am
To my knowledge, correct me if I’m wrong Ron, but Congress has never forbidden and has no plans to forbid copyright registration to disparaging works of authorship, so a parade of horribles based on this fear seems misplaced. [read post]
15 Feb 2022, 12:44 pm
Furthermore, TTAB proceedings do not carry preclusive effect against subsequent Article III Federal Court proceedings under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
1 Nov 2013, 8:36 am
Ron, can you say, right in gross? [read post]
29 Mar 2016, 7:53 pm
Question Number Two: What if Marty, John and Ron have the Second Circuit on their side? [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 11:52 pm
Many people (myself included) rejoiced when the PTO, citing the Lanham Act, revoked the team’s trademark registration. [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 7:01 pm
Thanks to Ron Rothstein of Winston & Strawn for alerting me that the district court just denied Whirlpool’s motion for reconsideration and request to certify issues to the court of appeals. [read post]
28 Jul 2017, 5:00 am
Looking forward to sharing the podium with Joel MacMull of the Archer firm (counsel for Simon Tam, where our friend Ron Coleman is a partner) to discuss “Trademark Registration and the First Amendment,” on September 28th at the Midwest IP Institute in Minneapolis. [read post]
4 May 2015, 9:16 am
Another might be Ron Coleman’s upcoming in banc oral argument at the Federal Circuit in The Slants case, to address the court’s sua sponte questions about whether the disparagement prong of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act violates Free Speech. [read post]
21 Dec 2012, 5:55 am
The plaintiff claimed that the Does' use of Ron Paul's name in the video constituted false designation of origin in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. [read post]
