Search for: "Rose v. U. S" Results 81 - 100 of 183
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
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]
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]
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]
16 Oct 2022, 6:51 pm by Bill Marler
The recall is for Urban Remedy Organic Revitalizing Tea Tonic Strawberry Hibiscus Rose. [read post]