Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Ninth Circuit, in a case of first impression in that circuit, recently adopted the long-standing policy of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's ('PTO') Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ('TTAB') that 'use in commerce only creates trademark rights when the use is lawful.' CreAgri Inc v USANA Health Sciences Inc., 474 F.3d 626 (9th Cir. 2007). The Ninth Circuit in CreAgri noted that 'at least one [other] circuit has adopted and applied this rule. See United Phosphorous, Ltd. v. Midland Fumigant, Inc., 205 F.3d 1219, 1225 (10th Cir. 2000).'
Sounds logical and fair, doesn't it? Why reward someone in a priority fight over a brand when the first one to use the brand got to the consumer so quickly by side-stepping that time-consuming process of legal compliance inherent in making the product or offering the service. To rule otherwise would be like giving the trophy to the New York marathoner who took the subway to get to the head of the pack. So, why is this case so controversial?
Bad Facts Make Bad Law
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?