Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 65 - Deposition Of Cory Louie (Google Senior Risk Investigator),
2010
Google
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 65 - Deposition Of Cory Louie (Google Senior Risk Investigator), Cory Louie
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. 68 - Deposition Of John Ramsey (Rosetta Stone Corporate Counsel),
2010
Rosetta Stone
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 68 - Deposition Of 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?
Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 54 - Chiang Deposition (Google Adwords Pm),
2010
Google
Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 54 - Chiang Deposition (Google Adwords Pm), Edward Chiang
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. D - Chiang Deposition (Google Adwords Product Manager),
2010
Google
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. D - Chiang Deposition (Google Adwords Product Manager), Edward Chiang
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. 55 - Chen Deposition (Google Trademark Counsel),
2010
Google
Vol. Vii, Tab 38 - Ex. 55 - Chen Deposition (Google Trademark Counsel), Terri Chen
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. 69 - Ninov Deposition (Rosetta Vice-President Strategic Research And Analysis),
2010
Rosetta Stone
Vol. Viii, Tab 38 - Ex. 69 - Ninov Deposition (Rosetta Vice-President Strategic Research And Analysis), Nino Ninov
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. C - Chen Deposition (Google Trademark Counsel),
2010
Google
Vol. Ix, Tab 41 - Ex. C - Chen Deposition (Google Trademark Counsel), Terri Chen
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 47 - Ex. 36 - Deposition Of Nino Ninov (Rosetta Stone Vice President - Strategic Research And Analysis),
2010
Rosetta Stone
Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 36 - Deposition Of Nino Ninov (Rosetta Stone Vice President - Strategic Research And Analysis), Nino Ninov
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 47 - Ex. 25 - Deposition Of Terri Chen (Google Trademark Counsel),
2010
Google
Vol. Ix, Tab 47 - Ex. 25 - Deposition Of Terri Chen (Google Trademark Counsel), Terri Chen
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. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 3 - Deposition Of Terri Chen (Google Trademark Counsel),
2010
Google
Vol. Xxi, Tab 58 - Ex. 3 - Deposition Of Terri Chen (Google Trademark Counsel), Terri Chen
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 Leigh Deposition (Rosetta Director Online Marketing),
2010
Rosetta Stone
Vol. Ix, Tab 42 - Ex. 2 - Van Leigh Deposition (Rosetta Director 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. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 63 - Deposition Of Van Leigh (Rosetta Stone Director Of Online Marketing),
2010
Rosetta Stone
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),
2010
Rosetta Stone
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),
2010
Rosetta Stone
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),
2010
Google
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,
2010
Santa Clara Law
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?
Controlling Patent Prosecution History,
2010
Franklin Pierce Law Center, Concord, NH
Controlling Patent Prosecution History, Thomas G. Field Jr.
The University of New Hampshire Law Review
[Excerpt] “One of the most salient effects of patent prosecution history arises in the context of the doctrine of equivalents. Under that doctrine, although patent claims may be found to be broader than their literal scope, territory surrendered during prosecution cannot be encompassed as equivalent. Nor can territory forfeited by initial failure to claim be captured under the doctrine of equivalents. Most attorneys who prosecute applications are apt to be aware of such problems and to take measures to avoid them.”
Vol. Ix, Tab 46 - Ex. 30 - Email From Bill Lloyd (Google Trademark Assistant),
2010
Google
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?
Journal Of Intellectual Property Law Managing Board, 2010-2011,
2010
University of Georgia School of Law
Journal Of Intellectual Property Law Managing Board, 2010-2011, Journal Of Intellectual Property Law
Materials from All Student Organizations
No abstract provided.
The Teaching Function Of Patents,
2010
Vanderbilt University Law School
The Teaching Function Of Patents, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In theory, a patent serves the public good because the disclosure of the invention brings new ideas and technologies to the public and induces inventive activity. But while these roles inherently depend on the ability of the patent to disseminate technical knowledge, the teaching function of patents has received very little attention. Indeed, when the document publishes, it can serve as a form of technical literature. Because patents can, at times, communicate knowledge as well as, or better than, other information sources, patents could become a competitive source of technical information. Presently, however, patents are rarely viewed in this manner. …
