Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Lanham Act protects trademarks and trade dress by creating civil liability for unauthorized uses of valid marks and trade dress that are likely to cause consumer confusion. The Act’s protections do not apply, however, to speech that is protected by the First Amendment. In a case that may have significant implications for the ability of mark holders to enforce their marks against many types of products, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is now considering whether consumer products such as sneakers can be considered “expressive works” to which First Amendment protections can apply. Vans v. MSCHF Prod. Studio, No. 22-CV-2156 (WFK) (RML), 2022 WL 1446681 (E.D.N.Y. April 29, 2022), argued, No. 22-1006 (2d Cir. Sept. 28, 2022). We report here on that case.
*May exclude premium content
By Christine Au-Yeung and Chidera Dawodu
The recent flurry of online impersonators, ranging from accounts posing as President Joe Biden to the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly, exposes the challenges of social media platforms’ verification and authentication processes.
By Stan Soocher
A question of law arose for a District Judge when a songwriter sued YouTube, claiming she never approved licensing her works to YouTube — whether the administration agreement’s notice-and-consent clause was a condition precedent to the administrator’s ability to license the songwriter's songs.
By Stephen M. Kramarsky and John Millson
The change in character of social media, from purely social communication to a mixture of the social and commercial, has had knock-on effects for courts applying traditional legal principles, notably, the application of copyright law.
By Sarah Schaedler and Jennifer T. Criss
A key step to ensure that employers own their intellectual property is having employees sign agreements which assign to the employer all intellectual property created in the course of employment.