Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Prior to the adoption of statutory protections, there was some protection under common law. New York: In People v. Phillips (1 Southwest L. J., 90), in the year 1813, the Court of General Sessions in New York recognized the privilege as in a decision rendered by De Witt Clinton, recognized the privilege as applying to Rev. Anthony Kohlmann, S.J., who refused to reveal in court information ...
Case Citation Year Vote Classification Subject Matter Opinions Statute Interpreted Summary; Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Company: 188 U.S. 239: 1903: 7–2: Substantive
Territorial extent of trademark rights Majority: Holmes: Trademark Act of 1905 The Trade-Mark Act cannot enjoin infringement occurring only intrastate; Common-law trademark rights to not extend to states where the mark has not been used. Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co. 305 U.S. 111: 1938: Substantive: Secondary meaning Majority: Brandeis
Rights holders must consider fair use before issuing a takedown notice. If the notice is issued in bad faith, the rights holder could be held liable for misrepresentation. A.V. ex rel.Vanderhye v. iParadigms LLC: 562 F.3d 630: 4th Cir. 2009 Commercial online database of student papers for plagiarism detection purposes was fair use MDY Industries v.
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. 539 U.S. 23 (2003) (it is a misuse of trademark law to try to use the doctrine of reverse passing off to assert protection over a formerly copyrighted work which has passed into public domain) Derry v. Peek (1888) LR 14 App Cas 337
Following the creation of the first statutory copyright law in 1710 (via the Statute of Anne), as rights belonging to an author (rather than to printers or publishers), the lapse of the Licensing Act 1662 in 1695 and Parliament's refusal to renew the licensing regime (1695), the practice of the English publishing oligopoly had not changed much.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Following the remand of the case to district court, Congress in 2006 passed the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, which essentially overturned the Supreme Court's Moseley decision. The district court applied the new law and granted summary judgment in favor of Victoria's Secret and issued an injunction against the use of the name Victor's Little ...