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?
Online Fantasy Sports Litigation And The Need For A Federal Right Of Publicity Statute,
2010
Duke Law
Online Fantasy Sports Litigation And The Need For A Federal Right Of Publicity Statute, Risa J. Weaver
Duke Law & Technology Review
The right of publicity is currently a jumble of state common law and state statutes, but the online fantasy sports industry crosses state lines with ease. Having witnessed the great revenue potential of online fantasy sports, professional sports leagues are trying to strong-arm independent fantasy sports providers out of the business by using the right of publicity to assert property interests in the statistics generated by professional players, and used by fantasy sports providers to run their online games. The first such attempt--by Major League Baseball--failed. However, the state law nature of the right of publicity prevents any single court …
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?
Hybrid Vigor: Mashups, Cyborgs, And Other Necessary Monsters,
2010
Georgetown University Law Center
Hybrid Vigor: Mashups, Cyborgs, And Other Necessary Monsters, Rebecca Tushnet
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Does remix matter? This brief comment addresses the critique of importance, arguing that remix culture as well as the popular/mass culture from which it springs are of vital importance to human flourishing, invoking Donna Haraway's concept of the cyborg to investigate the fluidity, dynamism, and monstrousness of remixes and remixers.
Vol. Viii, Tab 39 - Ex. 3 - Google's Trademark Complaint Policy,
2010
Santa Clara Law
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),
2010
NERA Economic Consulting
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 46 - Ex. 70 - Deposition Of Kent Van Liere (Nera Expert - Statistical Analysis),
2010
NERA
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?
Section 230 Of The Cda: Internet Exceptionalism As A Statutory Construct,
2010
Texas A&M University School of Law
Section 230 Of The Cda: Internet Exceptionalism As A Statutory Construct, H. Brian Holland
Faculty Scholarship
Since its enactment in 1996, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has become perhaps the most significant statute in the regulation of online content, and one of the most intensely scrutinized.
The essay begins with a brief introduction to Section 230. As interpreted and applied by the judiciary, this statute is now conceived as a broad grant of immunity from tort liability.—broad not only in terms of those who can claim its protection but also in terms of predicate acts and causes of action to which such immunity extends.
Working from this foundation, I then seek to position the …
Remixing Lessig (Reviewing Lawrence Lessig, Remix (2008)),
2010
IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
Remixing Lessig (Reviewing Lawrence Lessig, Remix (2008)), Edward Lee
All Faculty Scholarship
This book review analyzes - and remixes - Lawrence Lessig's last copyright-related book, "Remix." It takes the central ideas, including some quotations, from Remix, and transforms them with some new examples and commentary of my own. Part I summarizes and critiques Lessig’s discussion of (1) the remix and read-write (RW) culture, and (2) its relationship to the sharing, commercial, and hybrid economies. Part II discusses some of Lessig’s reform proposals for our copyright system to foster a remix culture.
Fulfilling Government 2.0'S Promise With Robust Privacy Protections,
2010
University of Maryland School of Law
Fulfilling Government 2.0'S Promise With Robust Privacy Protections, Danielle Keats Citron
Faculty Scholarship
The public can now “friend” the White House and scores of agencies on social networks, virtual worlds, and video-sharing sites. The Obama Administration sees this trend as crucial to enhancing governmental transparency, public participation, and collaboration. As the President has underscored, government needs to tap into the public’s expertise because it doesn’t have all of the answers. To be sure, Government 2.0 might improve civic engagement. But it also might produce privacy vulnerabilities because agencies often gain access to individuals’ social network profiles, photographs, videos, and contact lists when interacting with individuals online. Little would prevent agencies from using and …
Visionary Pragmatism And The Value Of Privacy In The Twenty-First Century,
2010
University of Maryland School of Law
Visionary Pragmatism And The Value Of Privacy In The Twenty-First Century, Danielle Keats Citron, Leslie Meltzer Henry
Faculty Scholarship
Despite extensive scholarly, legislative, and judicial attention to privacy, our understanding of privacy and the interests it protects remains inadequate. At the crux of this problem is privacy’s protean nature: it means “so many different things to so many different people” that attempts to articulate just what it is, or why it is important, generally have failed or become unwieldy. As a result, important privacy problems remain unaddressed, often to society’s detriment.
In his newest book, Understanding Privacy, Daniel J. Solove aims to reverse this state of affairs with a pluralistic conception of privacy that recognizes the societal value …
What's Software Got To Do With It? The Ali Principles Of The Law Of Software Contracting,
2010
University of Maryland School of Law
What's Software Got To Do With It? The Ali Principles Of The Law Of Software Contracting, Juliet M. Moringiello, William L. Reynolds
Faculty Scholarship
In May, 2009, the American Law Institute (“ALI”) approved its Principles of the Law of Software Contracts (“Principles”). The attempt to codify, or at least unify, the law of software contracts has a long and contentious history, the roots of which can be found in the attempt to add an Article 2B to the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) in the mid-1990s. Article 2B became the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (“UCITA”) when the ALI withdrew from the project in 1999, and UCITA became the law in only two states, Virginia and Maryland. UCITA became a dirty word, with several states …
Government Speech 2.0,
2010
University of Maryland School of Law
Government Speech 2.0, Helen L. Norton, Danielle Keats Citron
Faculty Scholarship
New expressive technologies continue to transform the ways in which members of the public speak to one another. Not surprisingly, emerging technologies have changed the ways in which government speaks as well. Despite substantial shifts in how the government and other parties actually communicate, however, the Supreme Court to date has developed its government speech doctrine – which recognizes “government speech” as a defense to First Amendment challenges by plaintiffs who claim that the government has impermissibly excluded their expression based on viewpoint – only in the context of disputes involving fairly traditional forms of expression. In none of these …
Mainstreaming Privacy Torts,
2010
University of Maryland School of Law
Mainstreaming Privacy Torts, Danielle Keats Citron
Faculty Scholarship
In 1890, Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis proposed a privacy tort and seventy years later, William Prosser conceived it as four wrongs. In both eras, privacy invasions primarily caused psychic and reputational wounds of a particular sort. Courts insisted upon significant proof due to those injuries’ alleged ethereal nature. Digital networks alter this calculus by exacerbating the injuries inflicted. Because humiliating personal information posted online has no expiration date, neither does individual suffering. Leaking databases of personal information and postings that encourage assaults invade privacy in ways that exact significant financial and physical harm. This dispels concerns that plaintiffs might …
