Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case related to trademark law under the Lanham Act.In the 9–0 decision on judgement, the Court ruled that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement lawsuit is not required to demonstrate that the defendant willfully infringed on their trademark to claim lost profit damages.
Federal Trademark Act of 1870 Infringement requires a likelihood of misleading purchasers, not exact similitude; with laches, a court may deny past damages but still enjoin future infringement where infringement is clear. In re Trade-Mark Cases: 100 U.S. 82: 1879: 9–0: Substantive: Constitutional basis for trademark regulation: Majority ...
An accounting of profits is proper in a trademark infringement case only where the defendant engages in willful infringement, meaning that the defendant attempted to exploit the value of an established name of another. [45] Alternatively, a plaintiff may recover damages incurred if they show a reasonable forecast of lost profits.
Apple and Samsung litigated patent infringement cases in several European nations starting in 2011, with implications for device sales across all of the European Union. [ 75 ] [ 76 ] In August 2011, the Landgericht Court in Germany granted Apple's request for an EU-wide injunction banning Samsung from selling its Galaxy Tab 10.1 device, on the ...
Not a ‘slam-dunk case’ Attorney Josh Gerben told CNN that trademark infringement cases are “typically very close calls and depend heavily on the evidence the parties are able to bring forth ...
The Lanham Act prohibits "the deceptive and misleading use of marks" to protect business owners "against unfair competition." [4] The Act defines trademarks as "any word, name, symbol, or device or any combination thereof" used by any person "to identify and distinguish his or her goods, including a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the source of the ...
Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 599 U.S. 140 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case involving parody and trademark law.The case deals with a dog toy shaped similar to a Jack Daniel's whiskey bottle and label, but with parody elements, which Jack Daniel's asserts violates their trademark.
The criteria are often: aural, visual and conceptual similarity (often applied in trademark infringement cases). For the element of damage to goodwill, there may be a loss or diversion of trade or dilution of goodwill. The plaintiff need not prove actual or special damage; real and tangible probability of damage is sufficient. This damage ...