Law Commons^™

Vol. Xv, Tab 52 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

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. Xix, Tab 56 - Rosetta Stone's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion For Partial Summary Judgment As To Liability, Rosetta Stone

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. 28 - Rosetta Stone Unjust Enrichment Calculations, Rosetta Stone

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. Xvii, Tab 54 - Google's Reply Motion In Further Support Of Its Motion For Summary Judgment, Google

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. Xiii, Tab 50 - Google's Opposition To Rosetta Stone's Motion For Partial Summary Judgment, Google

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?

Harmless Boundary Crossings: Their Role In Comparative Institutional Analysis - Lecture Transcript - 10-31-2008, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

I also thank this morning's panelists. What I'm going to do is, first, say a little bit of an overview about what brings us all together and then talk about a particular project that many of you already have heard about, but it is something that has bothered me ever since I entered the field. It is the problem of harmless use, or what you might call a beneficial spillover that causes no loss to the person who is causally responsible for it, either in whole or in part.

Rethinking Copyright: Property Through The Lenses Of Unjust Enrichment And Unfair Competition, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

All Faculty Scholarship

Responding to Sara K. Stadler Copyright as Trade Regulation:

This Response examines Professor Stadler's argument that “the copyright grant be reformulated to consist of no more than an exclusive right to distribute works publicly.” He agrees that “copyright law ought to be visualized as a doctrine of unfair competition,” but offers an alternative conception of “implementing this ideal.” Balganesh writes, “Since copyright is about generating incentives for creation, we might want to connect [a competitive] nexus requirement to copyright's instrumental purpose through a test of foreseeability. Given that liability for infringement is premised on a showing of copying, such …

Toward A Third Approach: Modifying The Corrective Justice Model, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

The conception of the judicial role described in the second model is, of course, no more than a partial account of what some judges may do sometimes. A third way to approach "reap/sow" draws on a broader conception that whatever the role played by community norms, judges also aim to achieve a result that is consistent both with their own sense of justice and with precedent. As for precedent, perhaps the frequent references to "unjust enrichment" in intellectual property cases should be taken seriously. Perhaps the courts are analogizing to that area of law most directly concerned with imposing liability …

Workshop Notes On New Property Rights - 1985, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

There’s a growth-by-accretion of new property rights, largely pushed by an unjust enrichment principles. Such a principle is itself without definable 1imits in an interrelated society. My task: looking at this trend from different vantage pts, other than that of pure desert, is the trend a good one. My view is that by and large it is not, but what we’ll discuss today falls far short of any such broad conclusion.