Search for: "United States v. Beebe" Results 1 - 20 of 36
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Feb 2020, 11:28 pm
Likewise, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) held repeatedly that comparable strategies could constitute bad faith [e.g. here, here and here]. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 4:22 am
Brunetti.Here's what Thomas writes:Erik BrunettiFreedom of Expression Transcends Morality in US Trademark Registration by Thomas Key As the Court of Justice of the European Union is currently considering the role of freedom of expression in trademark law, the Supreme Court of the United States has made a sharp determination on the matter in Iancu v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 3:01 am
Belmora says that one need not own a trademark in the United States to bring a Section 43(a) claim (Bayer owned the mark FLANAX in Mexico). [read post]
23 Nov 2016, 9:16 am by Eric Goldman
Unite Here * Trademark Dilution Symposium Videos * Griper Selling Anti-Walmart Items Through CafePress Doesn’t Infringe or Dilute–Smith v. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 3:41 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  Inherent in this process is recognition that a lexical unit is functioning as a referent and not as a description. [read post]
7 Apr 2016, 2:27 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
This was an appeal from the United States District Court for theMiddle District of Florida in No. 3:11-cv-00819-TJC-JRK,Judge Timothy J. [read post]
21 Jul 2015, 2:45 am
Moreover, many of the seminal cases in the area predate such important new contributions to Commerce Clause juris prudence as United States v. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 4:23 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  Now it’s possible to look at when people stopped saying “the United States are” and said “the United States is” by copying the contents of an entire library: a nonexpressive use. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 8:11 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 Coca-Cola’s treatment in Canada v. [read post]
16 Sep 2014, 4:21 am by Terry Hart
The court begins its discussion by stating that “Transformation almost always occurs when the new work ‘does something more than repackage or republish the original copyrighted work. [read post]
2 Mar 2014, 1:42 pm by Bill Stalter
   The Supreme Court has expressed concerns how the facial challenge might be used to undermine the legislative process, and accordingly, the challenging party is held to a higher standard of proof:  To succeed in a typical facial attack, [the respondent] would have to establish “that no set of circumstances exists under which [the statute] would be valid”, United States v. [read post]
21 Oct 2013, 1:43 pm
– 5:05 P.M.SESSION V (with coffee break 3:30-3:50)NYS CLE Credit: 2.0, Areas of Professional PracticeCommentators on proposals presented, and Q&A PeriodJane Ginsburg, ModeratorMorton L. [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 11:10 am
United States (Alvarez Machain II), 266 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2001). [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:30 pm by Theodore Ruger
Last summer, the Supreme Court put its money where its mouth was in terms of federalism doctrine in its landmark decision about the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in NFIB v. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods to protect against their parallel importation into the United States.  [read post]