Search for: "In Re TM"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,021
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2015, 9:58 am
Relationship to audience: what is the market you’re talking about? [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 10:41 am
The court’s addition of “primary” to put the plaintiff’s uses in a hierarchy, so that Gordon will benefit only TM plaintiffs who are actually in the business of producing expressive works to make their money, is understandable but adds to the epicycles and uncertainty here. [read post]
4 Dec 2010, 12:43 pm
They're like Academy Awards, but for audio books. [read post]
12 Jan 2022, 2:16 pm
The TM Act resolves the split. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 2:56 pm
Seems like relatively few women started business but you’re entitled to pass goodwill and inherit it and continue to operate. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 8:08 am
If you’re going to have a registration system, it’s the gov’t administering and not speaking. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 9:12 am
As usual, some neat pop culture/copyright/TM issues. [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 7:07 am
Perhaps if you’re the one who doesn’t have lots of empirical evidence, you lose. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 5:57 am
However, a plaintiff seeking to protect trade dress in a product line must articulate the elements comprising the trade dress and make clear how they’re distinctive. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 10:43 am
If Burstein is right [she is], then they’re no longer applying utility patent standard, which is what they wanted from design right. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 4:45 am
” In re Dana Corp., 12 USPQ2d 1748, 1749 (TTAB 1989). [read post]
21 Jan 2007, 1:39 pm
If you're on the road see some particularly beautiful specimen of a trademark, snap a photo and email it from your cellphone. [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 9:13 am
Though we may call §43(a) claims unfair competition, because they’re subject to all the same rules as registered TMs, we don’t really think about the differences. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 5:49 pm
Rothman: we have speakers using someone else’s TM, and speakers using their own, which seem like they’re more similar than you’re presenting. [read post]
20 May 2016, 12:25 pm
They’re more persuaded that the harms TM is trying to police, so even on the same balance the harms win. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 9:28 am
Explicit balancing of non confusion based rationales as justifications of and limits on TM—since we’re so bad at the empirical tests anyway. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 8:11 am
May want to deal with that, unless you’re just interested in competitive issues in claming color per se. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 12:04 pm
Distinctiveness says you can’t get a TM unless it is sufficiently distinct from the product you’re selling. [read post]
10 Dec 2006, 8:20 am
They're also hostile to use of dilution to get a market advantage against a competitor. [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 1:44 pm
"TM", yes; " ®", no. [read post]
