Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Google (114)
- Adwords (84)
- Rosetta Stone (58)
- Trademark (51)
- Rosetta (31)
-
- Consumer confusion (20)
- Keyword (13)
- Trademark infringement (12)
- Trademarked terms (12)
- Copyright (11)
- Discovery (11)
- Policy change (11)
- Trademark policy (11)
- Counterfeit (10)
- Expert testimony (9)
- Survey (9)
- 2004 (8)
- Brand awareness (8)
- Deposition (7)
- Complaint (6)
- Keyword tool (6)
- Patents (6)
- 2009 (5)
- Dilution (5)
- Landing page (5)
- Lobby (5)
- Policy (5)
- Sponsored link (5)
- Sponsored links (5)
- Unjust enrichment (5)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 241 - 270 of 328
Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 63 - Deposition Of Van Leigh (Rosetta Stone Director Of Online Marketing), Van Leigh
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 63 - Deposition Of Van Leigh (Rosetta Stone Director Of Online Marketing), Van Leigh
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. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 4 - Deposition Of Van Leigh (Rosetta Director Of Online Marketing), Van Leigh
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 4 - Deposition Of Van Leigh (Rosetta Director Of Online Marketing), Van Leigh
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. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 66 - Van Leigh Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Director), Van Leigh
Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 66 - Van Leigh Deposition (Rosetta Online Marketing Director), Van Leigh
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. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 52 - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Sr. Pm), Jonathan Alferness
Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 52 - Alferness Deposition (Google Ad Products Sr. Pm), Jonathan Alferness
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. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 1 - Transcript Of Motions Hearing, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
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. 30 - Email From Bill Lloyd (Google Trademark Assistant), Bill Lloyd
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 30 - Email From Bill Lloyd (Google Trademark Assistant), Bill Lloyd
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. Viii, Tab 39 - Ex. 3 - Google's Trademark Complaint Policy, Google
Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Ex. 3 - Google's Trademark Complaint Policy, 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. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 75 - Van Liere Deposition (Expert - Statistical Surveys), Kent Van Liere
Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 75 - Van Liere Deposition (Expert - Statistical Surveys), Kent Van Liere
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 42 - Ex. 2 - Van Liere Deposition, Kent Van Liere
Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Ex. 2 - Van Liere Deposition, Kent Van Liere
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. 70 - Deposition Of Kent Van Liere (Nera Expert - Statistical Analysis), Kent Van Liere
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 70 - Deposition Of Kent Van Liere (Nera Expert - Statistical Analysis), Kent Van Liere
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 - Declaration Of Margret M. Caruso, Margret M. Caruso
Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Declaration Of Margret M. Caruso, Margret M. Caruso
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
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. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's First Request For The Production Of Documents From Google, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's First Request For The Production Of Documents From Google, 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. Xviii, Tab 55 - Google's Reply Memorandum Of Law In Further Support Of Its Motion To Exclude The Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, 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?
Protection For Works Of Foreign Origin Under The 1909 Copyright Act, Tyler T. Ochoa
Protection For Works Of Foreign Origin Under The 1909 Copyright Act, Tyler T. Ochoa
Faculty Publications
One of the principal goals of the 1909 Copyright Act was to simplify and streamline the formalities required to obtain copyright protection. Before the 1909 Copyright Act, authors had to register their works before publication in order to be eligible for copyright protection; and notice of the registration had to be included on all copies published in the United States. If a work was published anywhere in the world before registration, or if the notice was omitted when the work was published domestically, the work went into the public domain. Under the 1909 Act, however, authors only had to publish …
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's Answers To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, Rosetta Stone
Vol. Xxiv, Tab 61 - Ex. 2 - Rosetta Stone's Answers To Google's First Set Of Interrogatories, 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 46 - Ex. 37 - Expert Report Of Dr. Kent D. Van Liere, Kent Van Liere
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 37 - Expert Report Of Dr. Kent D. Van Liere, Kent Van Liere
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. 29 - Email From Jason Calhoun, Jason Calhoun
Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 29 - Email From Jason Calhoun, Jason Calhoun
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. 45 - Email From Jason Calhoun (Rosetta Enforcement Manager), Jason Calhoun
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 45 - Email From Jason Calhoun (Rosetta Enforcement Manager), Jason Calhoun
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. 18 - Email From Baris Gultekin And Trademark Report (Google Product Manager Director), Baris Gultekin
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. 18 - Email From Baris Gultekin And Trademark Report (Google Product Manager Director), Baris Gultekin
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 42 - Ex. 1 - Reporter's Transcript, Motions Hearing, September 18, 2009, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Ex. 1 - Reporter's Transcript, Motions Hearing, September 18, 2009, United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia
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. 28 - Email From Christopher Klipple, Christopher Klipple
Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 28 - 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. 25 - Email From Christopher Klipple, Christopher Klipple
Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 25 - 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. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. 17 - Email From Baris Gultekin (Google Product Manager Director), Baris Gultekin
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. 17 - Email From Baris Gultekin (Google Product Manager Director), Baris Gultekin
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. Xx, Tab 57 - Ex. 14 - Document Minutes Of A Regular Meeting Of The Disclosure Committee Of Google, 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. Viii, Tab 39 - Ex. 4 - Naso News, Google
Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Ex. 4 - Naso News, 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. Ix, Tab 43 - Google Memorandum In Support Of Its Motion To Exclude Expert Report And Opinion Of Dr. Kent Van Liere, 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. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 28 - Email From Christopher Klipple (Rosetta Stone Marketing Manager), Christopher Klipple
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 28 - Email From Christopher Klipple (Rosetta Stone Marketing Manager), 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. 26 - Email From Jason Calhoun, Jason Calhoun
Vol. Vi, Tab 38 - Ex. 26 - Email From Jason Calhoun, Jason Calhoun
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?
Of Trolls, Davids, Goliaths, And Kings: Narratives And Evidence In The Litigation Of High-Tech Patents, Colleen V. Chien
Of Trolls, Davids, Goliaths, And Kings: Narratives And Evidence In The Litigation Of High-Tech Patents, Colleen V. Chien
Faculty Publications
While each patent dispute is unique, most fit the profile of one of a limited number of patent litigation stories. A dispute between an independent inventor and a large company, for instance, is often cast in "David v. Goliath" terms. When two large companies fight over patents, in contrast, they are said to be playing the "sport of kings." Some corporations engage in "defensive patenting" in order to deter others from suing them. Patent licensing and enforcement entities who sue have been labeled "trolls." Finally, observers of the patent system call the use of patent litigation to impose or exploit …