Search for: "People v Dogan"
Results 41 - 60
of 67
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2011, 7:14 am
Inwood v. [read post]
23 Apr 2011, 4:49 am
Heymann: This is tied to TM as source indicator v. [read post]
25 Sep 2015, 8:17 am
Stacey Dogan: Meurer & James Besson’s book on patents: pointed out that patent lacked clear boundaries as real property has; making true owners costly/impossible to identify. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 6:01 am
Shack and Jacques v. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 7:38 am
Canal Co. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 1:43 pm
That could also address some of the Article III standing issues I’ve been encouraging people to raise. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 10:29 am
For more on this in the trademark context, see Stacey Dogan’s new article, “We Know It When We See It. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 2:50 pm
., Prestonettes v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 9:02 am
Trademark David Bernstein The Tiffany v. eBay case’s result is inconsistent with Inwood, tort principles and Inwood's progeny, but David thinks it reached the right result. [read post]
13 Apr 2018, 10:31 am
Keeble v. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 7:54 am
Mark Lemley and Stacey Dogan, among others, have argued that this shouldn’t be understood as trademark use, but at the very least it has both commercial and message-delivering aspects. [read post]
24 Feb 2023, 1:27 pm
LTTB v. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 12:23 pm
Earliest surveys—1921 Coca-Cola v. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 4:13 am
Session 3: The Consumer in Different Trade Mark ContextsDo the questions that we have looked at in the first two sessions vary in different trademark and adjacent contexts? [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 10:43 am
They raise the price, eliminate competition, cut people out, transfer consumer surplus to themselves—but they are also giving something to people who canafford the chair: a chair with more narrative and thus more market value. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 10:43 am
Sarah Burstein: Reichman is worried that designs can’t satisfy nonobviousness—but the Federal Circuit has removed constraints.Reichman: the Fed Cir has improved it; but still, nonobviousness means that people don’t apply—the lawyers tell the designer there’s no chance. [read post]
30 Sep 2007, 2:47 pm
He's emotionally on the side of Lemley & Dogan, but ultimately trademark use reduces to confusion - do consumers understand something as an indication of source? [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 7:42 am
Pallin v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am
Jacob: real consumers in the box are perfectly normal people. [read post]
