(Podcast) The Briefing: Trademark Basics – Protecting Names, Logos, and Brands in Entertainment
The Briefing: Trademark Basics - Protecting Names, Logos, and Brands in Entertainment
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
(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
Mickey Mouse: un ratón con abogado
(Podcast) 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
How IP Can Fuel Your Startup's Growth
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
Innovation in Compliance: Visionary Leadership with Jackson Calame
The Briefing: Court Drowns Pepperdine's 'Waves' Trademark Battle Against Netflix
(Podcast) The Briefing: Court Drowns Pepperdine's 'Waves' Trademark Battle Against Netflix
The Briefing: The Stanley Cup Clash - A Trademark Battle (Podcast)
The Briefing: The Stanley Cup Clash - A Trademark Battle
(Podcast) The Briefing: Bad Spaniels – Infringement? No. Dilution? Yes
The Briefing: Bad Spaniels – Infringement? No. Dilution? Yes
Can My Trademark Be a Victim of Genericide? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
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
In a unanimous (and unsurprising) decision on Wednesday, the Supreme Court vacated an award of nearly $43 million in disgorged profits to a trademark infringement plaintiff because those profits were not attributable to the...more
Key Takeaways - A plaintiff prevailing in a trademark infringement suit is often entitled to an award of the “defendant’s profits.” 15 U.S.C. §1117(a)....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
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
In August, Vans, a globally-known footwear and apparel company, and MSCHF, a Brooklyn-based art collective, settled their trademark and trade dress dispute, entering an agreement that permanently enjoins and restrains MSCHF...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: Third...more
Thank you for reading the February 2024 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss the advertising rights of luxury resellers and important updates to the Warner Chappell Music v. Nealy...more
2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining use of a trademark and trade dress associated with an iconic sneaker design over a First Amendment...more
Does federal trademark law reach conduct outside of the United States? The Supreme Court addressed this question recently in Abitron Austria v. Hetronic International, Inc., which prompted us to revisit a related issue we...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