Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It’s rare that a day goes by without news of the impact artificial intelligence (AI) is having on our lives, for better or worse. While AI has many proven beneficial applications, outside my expertise, there is a concerning trend emerging in my field. As someone who has built my career creating and protecting brand equity, I’ve witnessed an increasing number of disputes that are based on mimicry of distinctive brand identities without permission. Traditional trademark protection cases now share courtrooms with proceedings based in the digital realm, dramatically changing both the playing field and the rules in brand infringement cases. As a branding professional who has seen my share of industry evolution over the years, it is something that I have been asked to weigh in on with more and more frequency.
To understand AI’s influence on brand infringement, one must go back to what I refer to as Branding 101. Historically, brands earned status by making or doing something that was relevantly different and more effective than the competition. It might be a formula to make clothes cleaner, teeth whiter, insurance cheaper, cars more fuel efficient, or to relieve headaches faster. When litigation arose, supporting rational claims was relatively straightforward, typically involving one brand infringing on another’s product, R&D practices, or marketing tactics.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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 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.
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 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.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
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.