Is My Guitar Pedal a Klone or a Counterfeit? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: The Wrong Argument – Why Authors Lost Against Meta and What Comes Next
The Briefing: The Wrong Argument – Why Authors Lost Against Meta and What Comes Next
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Cease and Desist Letters: Protecting Your Intellectual Property the Right Way
PODCAST: PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Cease and Desist Letters: Protecting Your Intellectual Property the Right Way
The Briefing: Anthropic, Copyright, and the Fair Use Divide
Will I Get Sued if I Create Another Hospital Drama? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
The Briefing: The Supreme Court Dodges the Discovery Rule Question—What That Means for Copyright Enforcement
(Podcast) The Briefing: Who Owns WallStreetBets? Trademark Use in Commerce and the Reddit Battle
The Briefing: Who Owns WallStreetBets? Trademark Use in Commerce and the Reddit Battle
(Podcast) The Briefing: Sinking the Rogers Test? What Pepperdine’s Lawsuit Could Mean for Hollywood
The Briefing: Sinking the Rogers Test? What Pepperdine’s Lawsuit Could Mean for Hollywood
(Podcast) The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
Unexpected Paths to IP Law with Dan Young and Colin White
Why Can't I Clean the Graffiti Off My Walls? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: Who Owns Jack Nicklaus? Lessons for The Creator Economy From a Brand Battle
The Briefing: Who Owns Jack Nicklaus? Lessons for The Creator Economy From a Brand Battle
(Podcast) The Briefing: Trademark Smoked: The Fall of General Cigar’s COHIBA Registration
The Briefing: Trademark Smoked: The Fall of General Cigar’s COHIBA Registration
In this episode of The Briefing, Scott Hervey and Richard Buckley dive into Pepperdine University v. Netflix, a trademark showdown over the use of the name “Waves” in the Netflix series Running Point. After Pepperdine’s...more
Under the Lanham Act, a plaintiff who prevails on a trademark infringement claim may be entitled to recover the “defendant’s profits” as damages. The Supreme Court in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc....more
Dewberry Group, Inc., FKA Dewberry Capital Corp v. Dewberry Engineers Inc., No. 23-900, 604 U.S. (2025) - On February 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously overturned a $43 million damages award arising out...more
On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. unanimously held that an award of “defendant’s profits” under the Lanham Act in a trademark infringement suit is only ascribable to the...more
Can a defendant’s affiliates’ profits be considered when awarding the “defendant’s” profits to the prevailing plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit under the Lanham Act, § 1117(a)? In Dewberry Group, Inc. v Dewberry...more
On February 26, 2025, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision limiting the scope of an award of the “defendant’s profits” in trademark infringement suits under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1117(a), to only those...more
The Supreme Court on February 26, 2025, overturned a nearly $43 million award granted in a decades long trademark dispute between two real estate companies. The unanimous ruling emphasized that under the Lanham Act section...more
The Supreme Court recently issued its opinion in Dewberry Group, Inc., FKA Dewberry Capital Corp. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. (23-900, Feb. 26, 2025), and addressed the issue of awarding profits in a trademark infringement...more
On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc., No. 23-900, a case concerning corporate separateness and disgorgement awards for Lanham Act trademark infringement....more
In Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers, Inc., the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Lanham Act does not permit courts to disregard corporate identity when awarding damages for trademark infringement....more
The United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc., vacating a nearly $43 million profits award and remanding the case for further consideration. The Court concluded...more
I. Introduction - A prevailing plaintiff under the Lanham Act may be entitled to several forms of monetary relief, among them an accounting of the defendant’s profits under Section 35 of the Act.1 The prospect of a...more
After a decade of litigation and a pivotal Supreme Court ruling from 2023, the legal battle between Jack Daniel’s and VIP Products has taken yet another turn, this time back in favor of Jack Daniel’s. On remand from the...more
Addressing this case for the third time, the US District Court for the District of Arizona found on remand that Jack Daniel’s was entitled to a permanent injunction after finding that VIP Products’ “Bad Spaniels” dog toy...more
In wrapping up the 2023-24 term and embarking on the 2024-25 term, the Supreme Court was asked to decide a number of intellectual property cases. The Court issued several significant opinions in 2024 and has taken several...more
At a glance, a unanimous Supreme Court, holding that two provisions of the trademark-governing Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 1114(1)(a) and 1125(a)(1)) do not apply extraterritorially and extend only to alleged infringement in...more
Every month, Erise’s trademark attorneys review the latest developments at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in the courts, and across the corporate world to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s end-of-term decision in Abitron v. Hetronic seems to have created more questions than answers about U.S. brand owners’ ability to leverage the federal Lanham Act in global trademark disputes. In the...more
U.S. businesses selling abroad cannot enforce domestic trademarks against foreign entities selling infringing goods into the United States through strawmen, according to a recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in...more
The Supreme Court’s June 29, 2023, decision in Abitron Austria GMBH v. Hetronic Int’l, Inc., No. 21-1043, ended decades of circuit splits on the standard for determining the extraterritorial reach of the Lanham Act (see our...more
On June 29, 2023, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act does not have an extraterritorial scope and applies only in cases where the alleged infringing “use...more
In a decision that may make it more difficult for brand owners to enforce their marks against infringers located outside of the United States, the Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the US Court of...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of the petitioner in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International Inc. However, the justices were divided 5-4 as to the precise reasoning and what facts...more
The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the Lanham Act infringement and unfair competition provisions "are not extraterritorial and that they extend only to claims where the claimed infringing use in commerce is domestic." In...more