Search for: "Marks v. State " Results 1701 - 1720 of 21,680
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Apr 2014, 6:56 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Since internal use of a mark as a keyword isn’t use of a mark in a trademark sense, and since Radiancy didn’t place the mark on any goods, displays, etc. or use the mark in any way that indicated source or origin, Viatek didn’t state a claim for unfair competition under the Lanham Act. [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 5:01 am by David Ardia
This is part V in a series of posts discussing First Amendment Limits on State Laws Targeting Election Misinformation, 20 First Amend. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 11:33 am by Lisa Ramsey
Although Tam quotes the statutory provision in the federal trademark law that states that merely descriptive marks cannot be registered as trademarks, 15 U.S.C. [read post]
3 May 2021, 6:29 am by Deirdre Kennedy
Lengthy use by the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam of its unregistered marks was not enough, by itself, to raise a triable issue as to the marks’ protectability. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 10:05 am by Paul Horwitz
 Here's the abstract: This Article was written for a symposium held at the University of Georgia School of Law marking the fiftieth anniversary of New York Times v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 8:02 am by Jason Rantanen
In Tam, the majority stated that “trademarks often have an expressive content” and Kennedy stated that “marks make up part of the expression of everyday life. [read post]