The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether the federal Lanham Act should be interpreted so broadly that domestic companies can leverage it to bar trademark infringement by — and seek significant damage awards against — foreign entities operating almost entirely overseas.
In March, the Supreme Court heard a blockbuster trademark case with significant implications for trademark law. After argument, reversal seems likely as questioning from the justices suggests that a long-standing precedent is unlikely to survive unscathed. But the Court also indicated concern over the broader implications of this case in the arts, entertainment, and publishing. Here's what you need to know about Jack Daniel's v. VIP Products.
Proving Damages for Trademark Infringement In the Eleventh Circuit
Leading the charge in thorny IP issues 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 article analyzes the summary judgment decision that set the stage for trial in Hermes International, and provides some takeaways concerning the legal landscape for NFTs moving forward.
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. 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.
Listen in on a post-webinar chat on "The Crypto Landscape: Post-FTX," with Blockchain Legal LLP partner Aaron Krowne and counsel Ali Derie, along with veteran entertainment industry lawyer Eric S. Goldman, about cryptocurrency's rocky recent past (and present) as well as its still-promising, if uncertain, future.
The Ninth Circuit held in VIP Prods. LLC v. Jack Daniel's Properties that VIP's "Bad Spaniels" dog toy mimicking the appearance of a Jack Daniels whisky bottle was protected expression under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court granted cert in November 2022 to consider the principal question whether humorous use of another's mark on a commercial product should be assessed under Rogers or the traditional multipart test of likelihood of confusion.
COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Affirmed for Cancellation of Tina Turner Musical MTV Floribama Shore Overcomes Trademark Infringement Claim New York Appellate Division Reinstates Lawsuit Alleging Misappropriation of Reality TV Concept Ninth Circuit Affirms Film Clip In Talent Acting Reel Was Fair Use
When it comes to expressive content, disputes over trademark rights in titles of creative works are commonly fought under the federal Lanham Act. Many of these battles play out in courts in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which has well-developed legal guidelines on the subject
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.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
