Law Commons^™

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 24 - Email From Christopher Klipple, Christopher Klipple

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 39 - Email From Michael Wu, Michael Wu

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 38 - Email From Michael Wu, Michael Wu

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 37 - Email From Michael Wu, Michael Wu

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex 23 - Email From John Ramsey (Rosetta Stone Corporate Counsel), John Ramsey

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Trademark Litigation As Consumer Conflict, Michael Grynberg

College of Law Faculty

Trademark litigation typically unfolds as a battle between competing sellers who argue over whether the defendant's conduct is likely to confuse consumers. This is an unfair fight. In the traditional narrative, the plaintiff defends her trademark while simultaneously protecting consumers at risk for confusion. The defendant, relatively speaking, stands alone. The resulting "two-against-one" storyline gives short shrift to the interests of nonconfused consumers who may have a stake in the defendant's conduct. As a result, courts are too receptive to nontraditional trademark claims where the case for consumer harm is questionable. Better outcomes are available by appreciating trademark litigation's parallel …

Is A Rose By Any Other Image Still A Rose? Disconnecting Dilution’S Similarity Test From Traditional Trademark Concepts, Jasmine C. Abdel-Khalik

Faculty Works

Federal dilution doctrine suffers the typical growing pains of an adolescent struggling to determine its identity and boundaries. Congress did not create a federal dilution claim until 1995 and significantly amended in 2006. As currently conceived in the Lanham Act, a federal dilution by blurring claim involves the owner of a famous, [senior] mark bringing suit against the owner of a junior mark, which must be used after the senior mark has achieved fame, but only if the junior mark is sufficiently similar to impair the distinctiveness of the senior mark. The statute identifies several factors that can be used …

Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 62 - Hagan Deposition (Former Google Managing Counsel - Trademarks, Jewelry Maker), Rose Hagan

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 18 - Email From Gina Reinhold (Adwords Associate), Gina Reinhold

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 36 - Email From Michael Wu, Michael Wu

Rosetta Stone v. Google (Joint Appendix)

Exhibits from the un-sealed joint appendix for Rosetta Stone Ltd., v. Google Inc., No. 10-2007, on appeal to the 4th Circuit. Issue presented: Under the Lanham Act, does the use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising result in infringement when there is evidence of actual confusion?

New Research Uses For Patent And Trademark Data, Roger V. Skalbeck

Law Faculty Publications

In this article, I examine alternative uses for information found in patent and trademark filing databases, suggesting ways to locate a law firm's clients, perform competitive intelligence, and locate or investigate expert witnesses. Finally, I talk about an interesting non-law use of patent data, i.e., historical research.

The Other Famous Marks Doctrine, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

Debates on protection for famous trademarks often center around state and federal antidilution laws. Both the old Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 and the new Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 have generated many law review articles and numerous symposia. The dilution law focuses on trademarks deemed famous within U.S. boundaries. A debate on protection for famous trademarks today is incomplete without a discussion of the other famous marks doctrine. The other famous marks doctrine recognizes marks famous in other countries without actual use in the country where a user adopts the trademark on similar goods and services.

In …

Email To Bob Bone Re: Idea Expression Dichotomy, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

This is to recap our discussion, to make sure we're on the same page, and carry this a bit further. I'm very excited.

Selling It First, Stealing It Later: The Trouble With Trademarks In Corporate Transactions In Bankruptcy, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

Why does AI get two bites of the “Apple” trademark? Should AI be allowed to grant the right to use the trademark “perpetual and exclusive” with the sale of the music division and steal it back for free, ten years later? This article is part of an ongoing and broader inquiry into the intersection of trademark, contract and bankruptcy laws. This article argues that recent bankruptcy decisional law, notably the In re Exide Technologies decision, misunderstands the “perpetual and exclusive” trademark transaction, deeming it as an ordinary “license” when it is truly an outright sale. This article explains that the …

When Bias Is Bipartisan: Teaching About The Democratic Process In An Intellectual Property Law Republic, Ann Bartow

Law Faculty Scholarship

[Introduction]: Intellectual property law courses offer law professors the opportunity to teach a subject area rich with complicated statutory and court-made doctrines about which students do not usually have strong or extensively delineated moral views. I It also gives everyone in the classroom a refreshing break from the traditional partisanship of political party politics. Identification as a Democrat or Republican does not provide too much guidance or create too many expectations about a person's views of intellectual property issues, freeing classroom debates from the constrictions that political loyalties impose in so many other contexts.

Sight, Sound And Meaning: Teaching Intellectual Property With Audiovisual Materials, Rebecca Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article addresses the author's experience using audiovisual materials from the Georgetown Intellectual Property Teaching Resources database. She used audiovisual materials extensively in class to allow students to see the subject matter of the cases rather than just reading verbal descriptions and enable them to apply the principles they read about to new, concrete examples. Many students in IP courses have special interests in music, film, or the visual arts, and the database allows her--and other teachers--to present materials that engage them. She found that students are more willing to speak up in class when they can see or hear …

The Trademark Use Requirement In Dilution Cases, Stacey Dogan

Faculty Scholarship

The trademark use doctrine plays a critical role in ensuring that trademark law serves its proper purpose of encouraging market exchange and lowering consumer search costs. As we have explained in detail elsewhere, the doctrine ensures that trademarks do not become a weapon used to suppress speech or to interfere with rather than promote the efficient operation of the marketplace.

Those goals are even more important in the context of trademark dilution. Unlike a normal cause of action for trademark infringement, trademark dilution gives broader rights to a few famous mark owners to prevent even non-confusing uses in order to …

Intellectual Property For Market Experimentation, Michael B. Abramowicz, John F. Duffy

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

Intellectual property protects investments in the production of information, but the literature on the topic has largely neglected one type of information that intellectual property might protect: information about the market success of goods and services. A first entrant into a market often cannot prevent other firms from free-riding on information about consumer demand and market feasibility. Despite the existence of some first-mover advantages, the incentives to be the first entrant into a market may sometimes be inefficiently low, thereby giving rise to a net first-mover disadvantage and discouraging innovation. Intellectual property may counteract this inefficiency by providing market exclusivity, …

Gone In Sixty Milliseconds: Trademark Law And Cognitive Science, Rebecca Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Trademark dilution is a cause of action for interfering with the uniqueness of a trademark. For example, consumers would probably not think that "Kodak soap" was produced by the makers of Kodak cameras, but its presence in the market would diminish the uniqueness of the original Kodak mark. Trademark owners think dilution is harmful but have had difficulty explaining why. Many courts have therefore been reluctant to enforce dilution laws, even while legislatures have enacted more of them over the past half century. Courts and commentators have now begun to use psychological theories, drawing on associationist models of cognition, to …

Teaching Trademark Theory Through The Lens Of Distinctiveness, Mark P. Mckenna

Journal Articles

This contribution to the annual teaching edition of the Saint Louis University Law Journal encourages teachers to begin trademark law courses using the concept of distinctiveness as a vehicle for articulating producer and consumer perspectives in trademark law. Viewing the law through these sometimes different perspectives helps in approaching a variety of doctrines in trademark law, and both perspectives are relatively easy to grasp in the context of distinctiveness.

A Winning Solution For Youtube And Utube? Corresponding Trademarks And Domain Name Sharing, Jacqueline D. Lipton

Articles

In June of 2007, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio ruled on a motion to dismiss various claims against the Youtube video-sharing service. The claimant was Universal Tube and Rollform Equipment Corp ("Universal"), a manufacturer of pipes and tubing products. Since 1996, Universal has used the domain name utube.com - phonetically the same as Youtube's domain name, youtube.com. Youtube.com was registered in 2005 and gained almost-immediate popularity as a video-sharing website. As a result, Universal experienced excessive web traffic by Internet users looking for youtube.com and mistakenly typing utube.com into their web browsers. Universal's servers …

Who Owns 'Hillary.Com'? Political Speech And The First Amendment In Cyberspace, Jacqueline D. Lipton

Articles

In the lead-up to the next presidential election, it will be important for candidates both to maintain an online presence and to exercise control over bad faith uses of domain names and web content related to their campaigns. What are the legal implications for the domain name system? Although, for example, Senator Hillary Clinton now owns "hillaryclinton.com", the more generic "hillary.com" is registered to a software firm, Hillary Software, Inc. What about "hillary2008.com"? It is registered to someone outside the Clinton campaign and is not currently in active use. This article examines the large gaps and inconsistencies in current domain …

Celebrity In Cyberspace: A Personality Rights Paradigm For Personal Domain Name Disputes, Jacqueline D. Lipton

Articles

When the Oscar-winning actress, Julia Roberts, fought for control of the domain name, what was her aim? Did she want to reap economic benefits from the name? Probably not, as she has not used the name since it was transferred to her. Or did she want to prevent others from using it on either an unjust enrichment or a privacy basis? Was she, in fact, protecting a trademark interest in her name? Personal domain name disputes, particularly those in the space, implicate unique aspects of an individual's persona in cyberspace. Nevertheless, most of the legal rules developed for these disputes …

Advertising And The Transformation Of Trademark Law, Mark Bartholomew

Journal Articles

Despite the presence of a vigorous debate over the proper scope of trademark protection, scholars have largely ignored study of trademark law's origins. It would be a mistake, however, to ignore the history behind trademark law. Scrutiny of the formative era in American trademark law yields two important conclusions. First, courts granted robust legal protection to trademark holders in the early twentieth century because they accepted the benign view of advertising presented to them by advertisers. As advertising became linked to cultural progress and social cohesion, courts adopted doctrinal revisions to protect advertising's value that remain embedded in modern trademark …