Search for: "Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. Penguin Books USA, Inc."
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Aug 2021, 3:06 pm
Penguin Books USA Dr. [read post]
21 Mar 2019, 1:58 pm
Penguin Books USA, Inc. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 8:30 am
Penguin Books USA, Inc. [read post]
11 Jan 2009, 4:42 pm
Penguin Books USA Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997). 4. [read post]
24 Sep 2007, 8:04 am
Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394, 1405 (9th Cir. 1997), and the Barbie Girl case, Mattel, Inc. v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 2:26 pm
Penguin Books USA, Inc., 924 F. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 11:50 am
Penguin Books USA, Inc., 924 F. [read post]
23 Sep 2007, 9:12 pm
Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394, 1405 (9th Cir. [read post]
3 Jun 2008, 7:20 am
Seuss Enterprises v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 4:32 am
Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 8:09 am
As discussed here, if considered satire, not parody, Dumb Starbucks could be liable for infringement (Dr Seuss Enterprises v Penguin Books USA (1997)).It seems unlikely that adding DUMB- provides enough distinction for it to avoid being considered an unauthorised derivative of Starbucks’ copyrighted works. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 10:02 am
Penguin Books, USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997). [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 6:07 am
Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. [read post]
