Filewrapper

Trademarks: Property Plus Insurance

By Gregory Lars Gunnerson

Intellectual property is a category of property that includes intangible creations of the human intellect. It is widely accepted patents, copyrights, and trademarks confer an exclusive right. Unlike patents and copyrights, the constitutional foundation for trademark law is the Commerce Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 3, rather than the Intellectual Property Clause, […]

Continue Reading →

Domain Name Disputes: A UDRP Primer

Has someone registered a domain that is identical or strikingly similar to your brand name or trademark? What rights do you have and what legal remedies are available if you or your company find yourself in a dispute over a domain name? This article is intended to serve as a brief overview of domain name […]

Continue Reading →

The Eagles Sue Hotel California

On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair Warm smell of the courtroom, rising up through the air (sorry) Earlier this week, The Eagles sued a Mexico based hotel, aptly named Hotel California, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. The case, filed May 1, 2017, isEagles Ltd v Hotel California Baja LLC et […]

Continue Reading →

Political Campaigns & Unauthorized Music

As the presidential caucuses approach so do the opportunities for political candidates to end up in the headlines for using unauthorized music in their campaigns. In nearly every campaign cycle you hear about a recording artist upset that a politician or campaign used the artist’s music without authorization. A list of notable disputes include Bruce […]

Continue Reading →

Are electronic transmissions “articles”within 19 U.S.C. § 1337?

The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) is authorized by federal law (39 U.S.C. § 1337) to take action against the “importation … of articles that (i) infringe a valid and enforceable U.S. patent.”USITC investigations represent an alternative to federal court intellectual property litigation, and may be especially useful where the allegedly infringing act involves […]

Continue Reading →

Passing Off and Taking Credit for Architectural Plans

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has issued a decision in Gensler v. Strabala, overturning a district court’s ruling dismissing a complaint for trademark infringement under §43(a) of the Lanham Act. Strabala, a former Design Director and architect for the architectural firm Gensler & Associates, formed his own design firm, 2Define […]

Continue Reading →

The Ongoing Battle of Copyright Protection and Pre-1972 Sound Recordings

Federal Copyright Law generally protects works that are fixed in a tangible medium from unauthorized use, including copying, performance, exhibition, and broadcasting. However, sound recordings from before 1972 are treated uniquely under the law—a situation that has resulted in real legal problems. When enacted, the Federal Copyright Law preempted any state rights relating to copyright […]

Continue Reading →

New and Useful – July 10, 2013

· InConvolve v. Compaq Computer the Federal Circuit affirmed in part the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ruling that Compaq Computer Corp., Seagate Technology, LLC., and Seagate Technology, Inc. did not misappropriate 11 of 15 alleged trade secrets from Convolve, Inc. In addition, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district […]

Continue Reading →

Tenth Circuit: No trademark infringement, unfair competition, or cybersquatting by parody sites

In a decision last week, the Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment finding no trademark infringement, no unfair competition, and no cybersquatting. The district court held, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed, that none of the three elements of a trademark infringement action was proven, namely that the mark was not protectable, […]

Continue Reading →

Quality of investigation irrelevant to whether claims objectively baseless

In a Wednesday decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision that a patent holder's communications with a competitor's customers that the competitor's products were infringing were not objectively baseless, and therefore could not support state law tort claims of unfair competition, intentional interference with contractual relations, interference with prospective economic advantage, and trade […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up