My colleagues in our Litigation practice, Harvey Saferstein and Nada I. Shamonki, recently authored an alert “Another Shoe Drops in Washington: Ninth Circuit Expands Personal Jurisdiction over Willful Copyright Infringers”. On December 17, in Washington Shoe Co. v. A-Z Sporting Goods, Inc., the Ninth Circuit expanded the exercise by Federal District Courts of personal jurisdiction over… Continue Reading
Category Archives: Litigation
Subscribe to Litigation RSS FeedAn Update: The Cost Of An Illegal Download
Posted in Copyright, Copyright Infringement, Damages, Fair Use, Litigation, Music, Statutory DamagesWritten by Susan Neuberger Weller As you may recall, we asked the question in a recent blog post “Are You Willing to Pay $22,500 to Download A Song? ” Well, we now ask “Are you willing to pay $9250 to download a song?”
Further to the “Copying from the Internet” Issue…..
Posted in Copyright, Copyright Infringement, Damages, Fair Use, LitigationWritten by Susan Neuberger Weller In our August 14th blog, we explained why just because you can copy something from the Internet, doesn’t mean you should copy from the Internet. A case on this very issue that has been around for several years involved the well-known “Hope” poster of President Obama’s face made during the… Continue Reading
Louboutin Wins Round Two Against Yves Saint Laurent in Fight Over Red Soles
Posted in Color, Fashion, Litigation, Trademark, Trademark InfringementWritten by Joseph DiCioccio The Second Circuit recently issued an opinion in the Louboutin v. Yves Saint Laurent trademark case. To refresh your memory, Louboutin, the high-end women’s shoe designer, had secured a U.S. trademark registration for the color red as used on the outsoles of women’s shoes. Yves Saint Laurent had been selling shoes… Continue Reading
The U.S. Supreme Court Grants Cert to Decide Scope of First Sale Doctrine
Posted in Copyright, Copyright Infringement, First Sale, LitigationWritten by Susan Neuberger Weller The U.S. Supreme Court has granted cert in order to decide an issue of great importance to all businesses involved in manufacturing and distributing products throughout the world, particularly those involved in retailing and importation, namely, whether foreign made works intended for sale outside the U.S., in which the copyright… Continue Reading
Avoid a “Heart Attack”: Promptly Register Your Trademarks
Posted in Intent-To-Use Applications, Litigation, Trademark, Trademark Infringement, Trademark ProsecutionWritten by Susan Neuberger Weller On July 6, 2012, in Lebewohl v. Heart Attack Grill, LLC , a New York Judge made it possible, in the words of the Wall Street Journal, for people to continue to “Order Up a Heart Attack” in, at least, Las Vegas and Manhattan. Since 2004, the Second Avenue Deli, a… Continue Reading
Is It Proper To Say You Google On GOOGLE®?
Posted in Domain Name, Genericide, Litigation, Trademark, Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution PolicyWritten by Susan Weller Do you “google?” That is the essence of the question before the Federal District Court in Arizona in a Complaint filed on May 21, 2012 by David Elliott against Internet search engine giant Google, Inc. In Elliot v Google, Inc., CV-12-1072-PHX-MHB, Elliot claims that Google’s once distinctive mark GOOGLE® has become… Continue Reading
Fourth Circuit Resurrects Rosetta Stone’s Challenge to Google’s AdWords Program
Posted in Dilution, Google Adwords, Litigation, Trademark InfringementOn Monday, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision ending Rosetta Stone’s trademark infringement case against Google. Rosetta Stone’s complaint, filed in 2009, alleged that Google infringed Rosetta Stone’s trademark rights by selling its trademarks as keywords to third-party competitors without Rosetta Stone’s permission. Under Google’s AdWords program, Google offers advertisers the ability… Continue Reading
Viacom Lives to Fight Another Day in YouTube DMCA Suit
Posted in Copyright, Copyright Infringement, Digital Millenium Copyright Act, Litigation, Red Flag Knowledge, Safe Harbor, Willful BlindnessWritten By Joseph M. DiCioccio The Second Circuit has vacated District Court (S.D.N.Y.) Judge Louis L. Stanton’s June 2010 dismissal of Viacom’s $1 billion copyright infringement suit against YouTube. In a thorough opinion, the Second Circuit remanded the case to the district court for further consideration of several key aspects of the case, including whether executives… Continue Reading
Who Owns a Company’s Twitter Account (and Musings on Social Media and Trademarks)?
Posted in Litigation, Social Media, TrademarkOur colleagues at Mintz Levin’s Employment Matters blog recently posted an interesting piece about a dispute regarding ownership of a Twitter account. The dispute arose from an employer/employee relationship, but serves as an important reminder about protecting your brand on social media sites. As alleged in the complaint (PhoneDog LLC v. Kravitz), PhoneDog operates a website that offers cellphone news and reviews and it hired… Continue Reading
Yahoo! Wins $610 Million Trademark Infringement and CAN-SPAM Award Over Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud Suit
Posted in Litigation, Trademark, Trademark InfringementWritten by Joseph M. DiCioccio This week, Yahoo! won a $610 million default judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in a case involving the infamous Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud perpetrated through the Defendants’ infringing use of Yahoo!’s trademarks and spam. Online scams and hoaxes are just a fact of life in the Internet… Continue Reading
Righthaven Loses Another Battle Over Attorney’s Fees
Posted in 17 USC sec. 505, Attorney's Fees, Copyright Infringement, LitigationWritten By Joseph DiCioccio Righthaven, LLC is having a bad week. You’ll remember from our previous advisorythat Righthaven is a copyright holding company that, until recently, has filed hundreds of copyright infringement lawsuits. The lawsuits generally allege copyright infringement against websites that have posted all or portions of newspaper articles and photographs Righthaven claimed it… Continue Reading
17 U.S.C. Sec. 505 Means What It Says: Attorney’s Fees Award to Prevailing Party Discretionary
Posted in 17 USC sec. 505, Attorney's Fees, Copyright Infringement, Damages, LitigationSection 505 of the Copyright Act provides that, in a copyright infringement action, the court may “in its discretion” award costs to a prevailing party. In addition, the provision provides that the court ”may” award a prevailing party its reasonable attorney’s fees as part of the award of costs. Despite this language, many litigants have taken the position that… Continue Reading
Google AdWords Litigation Update – Trademark Holders Denied Class Certification in U.S. Lawsuits
Posted in Google Adwords, Litigation, Remedies, Trademark, Trademark InfringementWritten by Jamison Arterton In the latest Google AdWords decision, a U.S. Federal District Court judge in Texas refused to certify two classes of advertisers who filed separate infringement suits against Google Inc. The complaints, filed in 2009, each claim that Google sold search terms that included registered trademarks to advertisers who were not affiliated… Continue Reading
Google Adwords Decision in Europe: Trademark Owners May Prevent Competitors From Using Trademarks As Keywords
Posted in Google Adwords, Litigation, Trademark, Trademark InfringementWritten by Geri Haight Remember last year when the European Union’s Court of Justice ruled that Google did not violate European Union law by selling trademarks as keywords and thereby permitting advertisers to purchase and use keywords corresponding to their competitor’s trademarks in Google ads? The decision let Google, as an intermediary, off the hook for trademark… Continue Reading
Remedies for Cybersquatting: Comparison of the UDRP and ACPA
Posted in Anticybersquatting, Domain Name, Litigation, Remedies, Trademark Infringement, Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution PolicyWritten by Jamison Arterton Last month, the kitchen and bath giant, Kohler Co., filed an anti-cybersquatting suit in federal court in California against several cybersquatters. In its complaint, Kohler alleges that it previously paid the named defendants $500 to transfer a domain name incorporating the KOHLER trademark in exchange for their agreement that they would not register any… Continue Reading
