Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Mega Brands has won 14 cases launched by competitor Lego regarding its Mega Bloks. The Lego Group has filed lawsuits against Mega Bloks, Inc. in courts around the world on the grounds that Mega Bloks' use of the "studs and tubes" interlocking brick system is a violation of trademarks held by Lego. [17]
Mega Bloks won a case at the EU's top court in 2010 against Lego's trademark registration of a red toy building brick. On September 14, 2010, the European Court of Justice ruled that the 8-peg design of the original Lego brick "merely performs a technical function [and] cannot be registered as a trademark." [11] Best-Lock and Lego bricks compared.
The Canadian manufacturer Mega Bloks was sued, Lego asserting that their use of the composite brick system of "studs and tubes" was an infringement of the trademarks held by Lego. On November 17, 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the right of Mega Bloks to continue selling the product in Canada. [31]
In 2005, Isidor's son, Sydney, and his two sons sold RoseArt to Mega Brands. [3] In September 2006, the Rosens, as former owners of Rose Art Industries, filed suit against Mega Brands, alleging insider trading by company executives in 2005 and 2006. [4] Mega Brands counter sued and in November 2009 the parties settled.
A federal judge in New York granted the 19 states suing over DOGE's access to highly sensitive taxpayer records a temporary restraining order. Judge Paul Engelmayer wrote that the court believed ...
Amazon is suing a Washington state agency to prevent the release of some company materials to The Washington Post, the newspaper which is owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. In a lawsuit filed ...
Less than three years before Elon Musk tapped him to help overhaul the US government, Edward Coristine, then 17, was the subject of a heated dispute among executives at cybersecurity firm over his ...
Kirkbi AG v. Ritvik Holdings Inc., [2] popularly known as the Lego Case, is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada.The Court upheld the constitutionality of section 7(b) of the Trade-marks Act [3] which prohibits the use of confusing marks, as well, on a second issue it was held that the doctrine of functionality applied to unregistered trade-marks.