Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal Jury Rejects First Amendment Defense In 'MetaBirkins' NFT Standoff
Perhaps no other area in the technology sector — save perhaps the recent explosion of generative AI models — has raised as many thorny intellectual property issues as the proliferation of Non-Fungible Tokens, or NFTs, many of which are based on, refer to, or even incorporate, expressive works. Leading the charge have been cases addressing whether NFT makers who utilize other parties' trademarks can turn to the First Amendment as a defense to trademark infringement. This inquiry turns on the now decades-old test established by the Second Circuit in Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1989). The Rogers test allows defendants to raise a free speech defense if their use of a mark is artistically relevant to their work and does not explicitly mislead consumers as to its source.
On Feb. 8, 2023, after deliberating for three days, a jury in one such case, Hermès International v. Mason Rothschild, found the defendant — the maker of the infamous "MetaBirkins" NFT collection — liable for trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and cybersquatting, and ordered defendant to pay $133,000 in damages. The jury reached this verdict notwithstanding early rulings in the case by Judge Rakoff, both at the motion to dismiss and summary judgment stages, that the Rogers test potentially protected the defendant's NFTs. Hermès International v. Mason Rothschild, 22-CV-384 (JSR) (U.S. Dist. Ct., Southern District of New York, Feb. 2, 2023).
This premium content is locked for Cybersecurity Law & Strategy 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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.