Search for: "People in Interest of TM"
Results 21 - 40
of 516
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2012, 2:50 pm
Moving in the right direction for defining boundaries, so post-sale and initial interest confusion pose the biggest threat of unwarranted expansion of TM into other fields. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 9:00 am
People who are most likely to suffer difficulty carving out marketing space are those whose marks don’t have fame. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:26 am
Law takes into account interests other than those of TM owners. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 9:21 am
TM can do that can enforcing rights against people who raise search costs by deceiving, but not always. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 1:01 pm
People copied everything but the red sole. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 3:02 pm
Interested in output over input measures like marketing signals. [read post]
4 Oct 2008, 8:24 am
People who don't do TM say that the Lanham Act specifies defenses and you can't just add them. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 12:23 pm
ContractsProf, The World's Foremost Web Provider of Odd Nuggets of Stuff Primarily of Interest to People Who Teach Contract Law,tm has once again made the list of the top law-professor-edited legal blogs in this quadrant of the Milky Way. [read post]
23 Apr 2011, 4:49 am
McKenna: it might have been clearer that this is not about consumers, but the interest of mark owners, which might have put people on guard about the expansion of the right. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 12:04 am
There are many people to consider as potential arbitrators, such as former Supreme Court Judge Louis Harms, or recently retired Chris Job and Alan Smith, and there may be others (who are all more than qualified and may even be interested).There are a number of considerations which make arbitration and mediation an attractive option. [read post]
11 Dec 2006, 6:47 am
Rochelle Dreyfuss, NYU School of Law: Her general doubts about extensions of TM law including initial interest confusion, post sale confusion, and dilution, have been mentioned by many people. [read post]
31 Jan 2025, 10:51 am
Not interested in specific sources like NYT, but in mindsets. [read post]
11 Aug 2006, 11:03 am
The Ninth Circuit has always seemed to have more than its fair share of interesting trademark cases. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 6:16 pm
Mark McKenna should be interested in this one, which also features Stacey Dogan and Glynn Lunney. [read post]
27 Sep 2013, 7:50 am
Complicates the account that people are only interested in the TM and anything else is diversion. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 10:59 am
Only prescriptive claim: TM should endogenize the public interest. [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 8:20 am
Rogers, by its terms, doesn’t apply to title v. title contests, but this isn’t exactly a title v. title contest, more franchise v. franchise, and also the Second Circuit’s later Cliffs Notes decision points out that First Amendment principles should also affect analysis of title v. title claims, given that authors have expressive interests in naming and that interest doesn’t disappear when another author is the… [read post]
3 May 2025, 10:54 am
Lemley: TM moved from sitting outside the 1A b/c TM owners didn’t sue people for using existing products in movies or video games or using TM names in books. [read post]
2 May 2025, 3:18 pm
Elster is interesting in that regard. [read post]
24 Jul 2015, 12:14 pm
TMs weren’t as valuable as they are; there was no TM bar, certainly not in Latin America, just a handful of people in US. [read post]
