Search for: "Rose v. U. S" Results 81 - 100 of 193
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Sep 2014, 4:21 am by Terry Hart
” Along the same lines, I suppose you could argue that it’s fair use to copy reality television shows so long as you watch them ironically. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 5:01 am by Terry Hart
” 2The parties subsequently settled; see Did Campbell v Acuff-Rose find 2 Live Crew’s song to be fair use? [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 9:45 am by Christine Branstad
KIRKE and WILD ROSE ENTERTAINMENT, L.L.C., In Pavone v. [read post]
10 Jun 2021, 12:25 pm by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
The Court also found that the signs are conceptually different, since a stylized letter ‘h’, or two interlaced letters ‘u’, could be perceived in Huawei’s mark, whilst the stylized letters of the initials of Chanel’s founder (Coco Chanel) can be discerned in Chanel’s mark.Thus, the General Court held that the marks at issue are different. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 11:55 pm
Basic taglines -- unlike the truly famous Just Do It and Don't Leave Home Without It taglines -- have not consistently enjoyed a meaningful scope of protection: For example, in a somewhat similar reverse confusion case, a 2002 opinion from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cohn v. [read post]