Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On Aug. 20, 2014, summary judgment was granted to the plaintiff insurance company, upholding its denial of coverage to indemnify judgments in two trademark counterfeiting cases. United States Fidelity & Guarantee v. Ashley Reed Trading, 'F. Supp. 2d', 2014 WL 4160218 (SDNY). The opinion provides insight to trademark practitioners about insurance coverage and provides information about strategies for trademark owners' enforcement efforts.
The Facts
Ashley Reed Trading and its principals, Scott and James Ressler, are well-known to the trademark counterfeiting bar. They have been sued by a number of trademark owners for counterfeiting activities (including Gucci, Tommy Hilfiger, Polo, and Fendi). The United States also sued them in a civil action for unlawful importation of counterfeit goods, and James Ressler was a defendant in two criminal cases brought in the Northern District of Georgia related to the importation of counterfeit goods, eventually pleading guilty to the charges in one of them.
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?