Law Commons^™

Proving Copying, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Peter S. Menell

William & Mary Law Review

Proof that a defendant actually copied from a copyrighted work is a critical part of a claim for copyright infringement. Indeed, absent such copying, there is no infringement. The most common method of proving copying involves the use of circumstantial evidence, consisting of proof that a defendant had “access” to the protected work, and a showing of “similarities” between the copy and the protected work. In inferring copying from the combination of such evidence, courts have for many decades developed a framework known as the “inverse ratio rule,” which allows them to modulate the level of proof needed on access …

Patent Prophylaxis: Expanding Access To Prep Through 28 U.S.C. § 1498, Jonathan A. Bell

William & Mary Law Review

Part I of this Note details the discovery of Truvada for PrEP [pre-exposure prophylaxis] and the ongoing patent infringement litigation brought by HHS [United States Department of Health and Human Services], discusses the patents currently held by CDC and Gilead, and examines the shortcomings of infringement litigation as a means to expand access to the drug. Part II analyzes the mechanism of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act and discusses two previously attempted applications for the HIV-management drug ritonavir to demonstrate why march-in rights will always fail to expand access to life-saving medications or reduce costs to consumers. Part III …

Cannabis, Consumers, And The Trademark Laundering Trap, Viva R. Moffat, Sam Kamin, Tim Maffett

William & Mary Law Review

At the moment, cannabis companies cannot acquire federal trademark protection for their marijuana products because the ''lawful use" doctrine limits trademark registration to goods lawfully sold in commerce. Given that marijuana remains illegal under federal law, this may not sound like much of a problem, but it has serious consequences for consumers. Without trademark rights, one cannabis company can simply use the brand name of another, more prominent, company on its marijuana products, and consumers will assume that they are getting the products they have come to rely on, with potentially dangerous results. The current approach of the United States …

Endorsing After Death, Andrew Gilden

William & Mary Law Review

An endorsement is an act of giving one’s public support to a person, product, service, or cause; accordingly, it might seem impossible for someone to make an endorsement after they have died. Nevertheless, posthumous endorsements have become commonplace in social media marketing and have been increasingly embraced by trademark and unfair competition laws. Entities representing Marilyn Monroe, for example, have successfully brought trademark claims for the unauthorized use of Monroe’s name, have successfully brought false endorsement claims under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, and regularly have promoted products through the Instagram-verified “@marilynmonroe” page. Marilyn Monroe survives today as a …

Withholding Injunctions In Copyright Cases: Impacts Of Ebay, Pamela Samuelson

William & Mary Law Review

Before the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., which ruled that courts should exercise equitable discretion when considering whether to issue permanent injunctions in patent infringement cases, courts routinely granted injunctions in copyright cases when plaintiffs proved that defendants had infringed or had likely infringed copyrights. Such findings triggered presumptions of irreparable harm, which were almost never rebutted. Only rarely would courts consider a balancing of hardships or effects of injunctions on public interests.

In the first several years after eBay, commentators reported that eBay had had little impact on the availability of injunctive …