(Podcast) The Briefing: Bad Spaniels – Infringement? No. Dilution? Yes
The Briefing: Bad Spaniels – Infringement? No. Dilution? Yes
The IP of Everything Podcast - Episode 22 - The IP of Dog Toys
Supreme Court Miniseries: Zero Spoof Whiskey
Podcast - The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Bad Spaniels in the Doghouse – Jack Daniels Prevails in Trademark Fight
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Bad Spaniels in the Doghouse – Jack Daniels Prevails in Trademark Fight
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Did the Court Bag the MetaBirkin Case?
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Did the Court Bag the MetaBirkin Case?
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Hermès Attempts to Bag Digital Creator Selling MetaBirkin NFTs
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Hermès Attempts to Bag Digital Creator Selling MetaBirkin NFTs
Podcast - The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Jack in the Box Pops a Spring Over Mascot Trademark Dilution
The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Jack in the Box Pops a Spring Over Mascot Trademark Dilution
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Prince Estate Wants Winery's 'Purple Rain' Trademark Back in the Bottle
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Prince Estate Wants Winery's 'Purple Rain' Trademark Back in the Bottle
Podcast - The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Nike Threatens Fire & Brimstone Over Satanic Custom Shoe Makers
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Nike Threatens Fire & Brimstone Over Satanic Custom Shoe Makers
JONES DAY TALKS®: 75 Years of the Lanham Act and Changes in U.S. Trademark Law
JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
The dispute at issue in Jack Daniel’s arises from a conflict between the well-known whiskey company and a dog toy company (VIP) regarding VIP’s unauthorized use of Jack Daniel’s trademarks and trade dress in connection with a...more
On January 23, 2025, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona issued a final decision ending the intensely disputed, decade-long litigation between Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. and VIP Products LLC....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in dismissing a trademark infringement matter under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, ruled that a district court “erroneously assumed the veracity” of the defendants’...more
After the district court, on remand, held that laches did not bar relief, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit again determined that the district court abused its discretion by not properly applying the presumption...more
Barbenheimer is a new term for consecutively watching the movies “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer.” In honor thereof, we present the Barbenheimer Legal Alert. Did you know Mattel sued, and lost, to stop the “Barbie Girl” song?...more
Jones Day's Meredith Wilkes and Anna Raimer discuss 2020's most significant developments in trademark law and preview what's to come in 2021, including possible progress in Washington on the highly anticipated Trademark...more
In a “somewhat unusual” trademark case involving directly competing products and marks using the same words, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed in part and affirmed in part the grant of summary judgment...more
The U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on April 23, 2020, by unanimously holding in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., et al. that a brand owner is not required to prove that a trademark infringer acted...more
Does My Video Game Violate Consumers’ Privacy Rights? The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) is the first broad-based state statute aimed at enhancing personal privacy rights for consumers. Following the example set by...more
Taking on issues of functionality and fame relating to trade dress rights, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s judgment after a jury trial on claims of...more
In U.S. trademark litigation, the focus is typically on injunctive relief: The plaintiff wants the defendant to cease use of the infringing mark before the plaintiff’s reputation is harmed or the strength of the mark is...more
On April 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that the Lanham Act does not require a showing of willful infringement to justify an award of defendant’s profits to the plaintiff. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v....more
In a recent unanimous decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court brought some welcome clarity to the question of whether willfulness is required in order to recover an infringer’s profits under...more
On April 23, the US Supreme Court resolved a six-six circuit split over whether a defendant must have willfully infringed a trademark for a plaintiff to obtain as a remedy the infringer’s profits. In Romag Fasteners, Inc. v....more
Late last month, in a landmark decision heralded by brand owners, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Romag Fasteners, Inc v Fossil Group, Inc that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit is not required to show that a...more
In a decision some believe may generate more trademark infringement litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a trademark owner does not have to prove a defendant acted willfully to receive a profits remedy in...more
On April 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., 590 U.S. ___ (2020), resolved a circuit court split by confirming that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement...more
White & Case Technology Newsflash - Willful infringement is no longer required for trademark owners to recover infringers' profits. In Romag Fasteners v. Fossil Group, the Supreme Court resolved a longstanding circuit...more
On April 23, 2020, Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered a unanimous opinion in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., clarifying that a Lanham Act provision does not require a plaintiff to prove that acts of infringement are...more
A unanimous panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld a default judgment and permanent injunction against an online marketer for trademark infringement, false advertising, dilution, unfair competition...more
On April 21, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a long-unsettled issue in trademark law, holding that Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act enables a trademark owner to recover the profits earned by an infringer without proving...more
Decision clarifies prior conflicting authority and holds that willfulness is not a prerequisite to recovering an infringer’s profits. Key Points: ..A finding of willfulness is not a prerequisite to a disgorgement of...more
Last week, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., No. 18-1233,[1] in which it held that the plaintiff in a trademark infringement action need not prove that the defendant acted...more
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Grp., Inc., No. 18-1233 (April 23, 2020) - In a landmark decision issued by the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the matter of Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Grp., Inc., No....more
On April 23, 2020, the Supreme Court resolved a decades-long circuit split as to whether recovery of an infringer’s profits under Section 35(a) of the Lanham Act requires showing willfulness and held that there is no strict...more