In this case, Tiffany versus eBay lawsuit, Tiffany have argued that eBay should be held responsible for contributing on user’s trademark violations, trademark dilution, and false advertising. However, the Second Circuit found that eBay was not directly or secondarily liable for such trademark infringement or dilution. Though, the appeals court remanded Tiffany’s false advertising claim to the lower court on the basis that some advertisements on eBay for Tiffany products may have been misleading (Anderson & Schvimmer, 2010). Tiffany argued that counterfeit merchandise bearing its name is sold on eBay and therefore they should be responsible for it, the web commerce company, does not itself put the items up for sale, and according to the case,
According to the court case on Pam Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., I am in agreement with the fact that the “district court granted summary judgment in favor of Huber” (Morgan, p.413) and that Wal-Mart gave Pam Huber, a maintenance associated job due to her disability. In doing so, I am also in agreement with the fact that Wal-Mart did not breach the American with Disability Act of 1990 due to the fact that Wal-Mart specifically stated what was required of Pam Huber to do on the job. Due to that, I am in agreement with Wal-Mart’s decision to hire a capable candidate in replace of Pam Huber due to their policy.
John Bell made a complaint against Harry Brandy who was his colleague at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. Bell made a complaint to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission alleging verbal ill treatment and intimidating conduct by Brandy. HREOC found that Bell’s complaint was justified and
Though Ira C. Herbert was correct that Coca-Cola had used the phrase “It’s the real thing” before Grove Press, Richard Seaver’s response was more persuasive. Herbert’s letter was formal and dry, while Seaver’s adopted an ironic tone to degrade Herbert’s case. The combination of appeals present in Seaver’s letter, when compared to Herbert’s reliance primarily upon logos, construct an argument that is
The main issue with regards to the applicability of S1322(4)(a) to the appointment of Helen was the meaning of the word contravention.
Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. is a legal battle concerning whether or not the company engaged willfully in gender-based discrimination. Underlying causes, organizational culture and ethical issues will be examined in determining how the largest private employer in the United States could have fallen prey to unfair labor practices.
Margaret Fuller was one of the most influential woman of her time. She was a very intelligent woman that had concurred three languages by the age of thirteen. She used her knowledge to open the eyes of many people. She was a true Transcendentalist. She was very vocal about her views on gender roles of the nineteenth century even though they were not considered traditional. She challenged the conventional gender roles of the men and women. She was not afraid to tell women to fight for their natural rights. Her audience was composed of both men and women. She makes sure to point out that when she speaks of men, she is referring to both men and women. One of her greatest literature written was The Great Lawsuit. It was
In the case of Chelsea Industries, Inc. v Gaffney there was a name that goes by the name Lawrence Gaffney who was the president and general manager of Ideal Tape Company (Ideal). This company was engaged in the business of manufacturing pressure-sensitive tape while being a subsidiary of Chelsea Industries, Inc. (Chelsea). Gaffney along with three other ideal executives he recruited decide to open a competing manufacturing company using their positions at Ideal to gather ideas, get customers, and equipment while Chelsea had no idea of their intentions. Chelsea decided to sue them for the damages. I believe that Chelsea would win this case and also be awarded for the damages. Simply put, an officer of a corporation cannot and should not
In an ideal world, consumers and companies would equally share the burdens of product liability and consumer responsibility. However, in the real world, we must make tradeoffs between these two. How we do this will not only affect our legal environment, but our economic and social environments as well.
2006). Burberry’s product line, especially the famous trademark plaid, unfortunately, is not difficult to imitate, the development of “fake Burberry” affects their revenue. In 2010, Burberry won $1.5 million in counterfeit case (Matthew 2010), but the counterfeit apparel and accessories is still the key issue for all major luxury brand (Maman 2012).
This decision by the Court evident exhibits the determined nature of the judiciary to not only safegaurd trade mark per se but to presever the properitory interest over different types of trademarks as a whole. Moreover, India has embodied in its statute the identical provisions as the Lanham Act for trade dress security but unlike the United State’s Trademark code, India has restrained itself from giving an extensive enumeration as to what can constitute as trade dress and what would be the ingredients for its infringement. This approach would prove to be benificial in due to the fact that judiciary’s freedom to explore trade dress infringement would be more. Although in the recent pronouncements this aspect of judicial scrutiny may be deplorable for the defendants as once the trade dress is acknowledged it would invariably lead to an infringement suit being made out and an injunction order being passed. Therefore, trade dress criteria’s not being set may turn out to be a double-edged sword
A trademark can be an essential platform for strengthening a company’s goodwill. A trademark entails any symbol, word, or phrase that can be identified with firm’s products and services. These items might be qualified as trademarks when they gain a signifying meaning among the company’s customer base (Maggs and Schechter 4). Nonetheless, the misuse of this proprietary asset can result in lack of legal protection and confusion among customers since it might be difficult to deduce the origin and identity of a particular product. As such, some companies have resorted to unconventional means of protecting their trademarks. This paper will discuss the trademark problems facing the assigned case study of VELCRO with reference to relevant statutory
Advertisement companies are created to make a strong emotional appeal and to persuade people to buy different goods and services. Marketing specialists and advertisers use different methods to gain popularity for goods they advertise. Unfortunately, they often manipulate facts and present wrong information in order to attract public attention and gain extra profit. John Leonard vs PepsiCo suitcase is notable became it became a vivid illustration of the wrong information presented during the advertisement company.
In brief, Canada’s history with trademarks can be traced back to pre-confederation in 1860, whereby the legislative council and Assembly of Canada adopted An Act Respecting Trademarks. Thereafter, the Trade-marks Act which is still in use today was enacted in 1953. Since that time, however, only minor changes have occurred within this Act. For instance, in 2005, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) wanted to modernize the Trade-marks Act. This included, but was not limited to changes to the regulation of non-traditional trademarks. This very brief historical overview shows Canada’s reluctance to make radical changes to the area of trademark law. This in turn creates a disadvantage for potential trade mark owners in Canada, as the law is not as comprehensive to cover areas such as non-traditional signs. Markets are constantly changing and with the innovations in technology, companies need these new and innovative ways to distinguish themselves in new ways to stay current in the marketplace and attract customers. Therefore with Canada’s stagnation in making changes in the law to in recognition of globalization and technological innovations, it puts Canadian companies at a disadvantage. However, with the passing of Bill C-35 it can be argued that slowly but surely, Canada will be on par with other jurisdictions around the world. This will shown by analyzing the current trademark law in the EU and US.
I received high grades in the several intellectual property courses I took during law school. I even had the opportunity to audit a trademark law course, where I learned about the Trademark Act of 1946 and several major trademark law cases. Additionally, I was a blogger for American University Washington College of Law’s Intellectual Property Law Brief (IPLB). As a blogger, I produced articles discussing a range of intellectual property topics, such as geographically descriptive trademarks, Internet service providers’ liability, music sampling, and foreign trademark infringement. My coursework and my work with the IPLB not only provided substantive knowledge of trademark law, but exposed me to a wide range of contemporary issues in trademark law.
One of the most important aspects of any business is its name. Our laws provide for a business to seek protection for its property. Congress established the trademark protections for businesses in the Trademark Act of 1881. It established a trademark law that applied to the interstate commerce clause in the Constitution (Busse, 2011). The trademark is considered one of the founding distinctions a company can own under our intellectual property laws. For consideration in this essay, we will discuss a very interesting court case that took place in the 1960’s. Back in the 1950’s, there were two restaurants legally established each with the name “Burger King.” In this case, two businesses were contending for the right to exclusively use