Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Tiffany claimed the contributory trademark infringement of eBay, which was a judicially constructed doctrine articulated by the Supreme Court in Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. and found the liability for trademark infringement can extend beyond those who actually mislabel goods with the mark of another. As established in ...
A daily look at legal news and the business of law: eBay Didn't Infringe Tiffany's Trademark, Court Decides In a case that may echo into the Google/YouTube v. Viacom copyright showdown, the 2nd U ...
The Supreme Court first held that liability for trademark infringement could extend beyond direct infringers in Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. [28] The Supreme Court articulated the following standard for contributory infringement: "If a manufacturer or distributor intentionally induces another to infringe a trademark, or ...
eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388 (2006), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously determined that an injunction should not be automatically issued based on a finding of patent infringement, but also that an injunction should not be denied simply on the basis that the plaintiff does not practice the patented invention. [1]
Westinghouse trademark, registered in the U.S. in the 1940s (automatic washing machine) and 1950s (coin laundry) but now expired. Linoleum Floor covering, [22] originally coined by Frederick Walton in 1864, and ruled as generic following a lawsuit for trademark infringement in 1878; probably the first product name to become a generic term. [23 ...
Google on Thursday defeated a trademark lawsuit brought by a British short film company over YouTube's short video platform Shorts, with London's High Court ruling there was no risk of confusion ...
Nominative fair use permits the use of a mark to identify the product that bears that mark, when (1) the product or service in question is not readily identifiable without use of the trademark; (2) no more of the mark is used than is reasonably necessary to identify the product or service; and (3) the user does nothing beyond use of the mark ...
As a result, the less distinctive or original the trademark, the less able the trademark owner will be to control how it is used. For the potentially infringing use of a trademark or service mark, fair use by a non-owner of the mark falls under two categories: