Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
IP News
'Polaroid' and Online Self-Promotion: A Cautionary Tale
In a recent decision by Judge J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York, the issue of trademark infringement collides with the dynamics of social media and online presence. Particularly, the court addresses the extent to which social media profile "bios" could confuse or mislead consumers. Can online community customs be construed to support a claim of trademark infringement under the Lanham Act?
The Lanham Act safeguards potential consumers from marketplace confusion, allowing for the appropriate sourcing of goods and/or services in creation of goodwill for brands and trademarks. Trademark law is primarily focused on source identification for the benefit of consumers. Thus, trademark infringement is the violation of goodwill and consumer trust by eliciting confusion within the marketplace.
For over half a century, courts within the Second Circuit have relied on the eight-factor balancing test established in Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Elecs. Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d. Cir. 1961), to measure potential customer confusion. These non-exhaustive Polaroid factors are the vehicle of Judge Oetken's opinion in Portkey Techs. PTE Ltd. v. Venkateswaran, No. 23-CI-5074 (JPO), 2024 WL 3387735 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2024).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.