Intellectual Property

The SharkNinja case as well as other well-established precedents serve as powerful reminders to advertisers of certain best-practices in choosing their trademarks or evaluating whether to challenge their competitors' trademarks.

Patents can provide the broadest and strongest form of protection in the video game field. They can protect the methods and processes performed by the game software, and they can protect the hardware components of the game system, both in function and aesthetic design.

Internet tools are becoming more sophisticated in measuring the impact of online disparaging and defamatory statements, paving the way for affected business owners and celebrities to fight back by filing defamation suits seeking to recover damages for the harm to their reputation and brand value.

Federal Circuit: Case Belongs In the Northern District of California, Not Western District of Texas Federal Circuit: Arbitration Clause Did Not Prevent Institution of IPR Petitions

The Federal Circuit recently clarified — and lowered — the threshold to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over an out of state declaratory judgment defendant.

Johansson alleges that, in order to generate new subscribers for Disney+, Disney intentionally interfered with her talent agreement with Disney affiliate Marvel Studios for her featured role in Black Widow — and thus allegedly induced Marvel to breach a promise in the Johansson/Marvel agreement for the film to be initially distributed in exclusive "wide theatrical release." Updated Oct. 1 to reflect a confidential settlement reached in the case.

The likelihood of confusion analysis is often focused on confusion at the time of purchase, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth and Federal Circuits permit mark holders to allege infringement based on presale, initial-interest confusion. Earlier this year, the Eighth Circuit joined the majority of circuits in permitting recovery for initial-interest confusion in certain circumstances.

the Tenth Circuit held that the Lanham Act can have extraterritorial application, if certain conditions are met. In doing so, the appellate court recognized — and further deepened — an ongoing circuit split.