Search for: "Payless Shoes" Results 61 - 72 of 72
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2008, 11:22 am
"Yesterday, an Oregon jury announced a $300 million verdict against Payless Shoes in a trademark/tradedress infringement case brought by Adidas. [read post]
7 May 2008, 9:48 am
adidas payless verdict - Upload a doc Read this doc on Scribd: adidas payless verdict [read post]
6 May 2008, 9:59 pm
The jury found Payless infringed or diluted Adidas’ mark or trade dress by using a two- and four-stripe logo on its competing athletic shoes. [read post]
6 May 2008, 2:02 pm
The Oregonian reports that Adidas won an astronomical $305 million trademark infringement verdict against discount retailer Payless Shoes this morning. [read post]
6 May 2008, 1:44 pm
The Oregonian reports that Adidas won an astronomical $305 million trademark infringement verdict against discount retailer Payless Shoes this morning. [read post]
18 Feb 2008, 8:33 am
They didn't consider intent - the fact that the Payless shoes were "inspired" by the adidas shoes. [read post]
3 Jan 2008, 10:16 am
View the article here01/03/2008A Texas police officer is accused of hiring a prostitute and paying her with his wife's shoes and clothes, MyFOXAustin.com reports.Scott Lando, a 45-year-old police officer with the Austin Police Department, allegedly paid the hooker with his wife's new Harley Davidson boots, a pair of studded blue jeans and a shirt, according to a search warrant obtained by the station.He also took the woman shopping at Wal-Mart and Payless ShoeSource,… [read post]
19 Oct 2007, 11:48 am
The shoes are sold were sold at Payless ShoeSource stores across the U.S. and Payless.com from August 2007 to September 2007. [read post]
19 Oct 2007, 11:48 am
The shoes are sold were sold at Payless ShoeSource stores across the U.S. and Payless.com from August 2007 to September 2007. [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 9:03 pm
-based subsidiary, Diadora America, Inc., filed suit in the Western District against Payless Shoesource, Inc., for trademark infringement, dilution, and unfair competition over Payless’ competing shoe logo. [read post]