Fantasy Baseball First Amendment Rights
February 28, 2008
Recently, the right of publicity of baseball players featured prominently in a federal appellate decision. <i>C.A.C. Distribution and Marketing, Inc. v. Major League Baseball Advanced Media, L.P.</i> The Eighth Circuit concluded that the First Amendment rights to run a fantasy baseball league by using the names, performance, and biographical data of professional baseball players superseded the players' rights of publicity.
TTAB Proceeding
February 28, 2008
In a proceeding before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ('TTAB'), if your adversary is a foreign entity with no employees in the United States, can you compel an oral deposition of the entity in this country? 'No,' says the TTAB, through its Manual of Procedure ('TBMP'). 'Yes,' says the Fourth Circuit, relying on '24 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. '24 in <i>Rosenruist-Gestao E Servicos LDA v. Virgin Enterprises Ltd.</i>, 511 F.3d 437 (4th Cir. 2007).
Protection from Unwanted Flattery
February 28, 2008
For the last several sessions, Congress has considered the Design Piracy Prohibition Act, which would expand copyright protection to include the cut and look of fashion designs. This proposed legislation could make many imitative designs illegal and add to the current, although somewhat limited, protections for fashion available under existing U.S. trademark, patent, and copyright laws. This article discusses these currently available protections, provides suggestions for designers for utilizing them, and examines changes to the Copyright Act proposed by the Design Piracy Prohibition Act.
IP News
January 31, 2008
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Famous Marks Doctrine: A Defeat in New York State
January 31, 2008
In <i>ITC Limited v. Punchgini, et al.,</i> the New York Court of Appeals declined to recognize the 'famous marks' doctrine, but it did confirm the possibility of protection under existing common law theories of misappropriation in certain limited circumstances.
Bone of Fido Parody: <i>Louis Vuitton v. Chewy Vuiton</i>
January 31, 2008
A biting satire it may not have been, but <i>Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC</i> nonetheless concluded that canine chew toys fashioned after Louis Vuitton handbags were a permitted parody that did not infringe or dilute Louis Vuitton's admittedly well-known marks. Although the decision scratches little new ground in the trademark jurisprudence of parody and infringement, it was a first opportunity for an appellate court to assess parody under the new Trademark Dilution Revision Act.
IP News
December 27, 2007
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.