skip to main
|
skip to sidebar
Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log
False advertising and more
Monday, December 02, 2013
Eric Goldman previews Lexmark
At Forbes,
here
. As is obvious, Eric and I part ways on several issues, but as always I respect his viewpoint.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Newer Post
Older Post
Home
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Rebecca Tushnet
Rebecca Tushnet
Email subscription
Subscribe
*
indicates required
Email Address
*
ABA Blawg 100
Subscribe To
Posts
Atom
Posts
Comments
Atom
Comments
Subscribe via RSS or LinkedIn
Atom
LinkedIn
RSS 2.0
Use If This Than That (recommended but needs setup)
"Bright young [wo]man"/"Yo, who the F is this?"
Harvard Law School
Mastodon (mostly repost of blog)
My website
Email me
Bluesky
Blog Archive
►
2024
(164)
►
December
(8)
►
November
(4)
►
October
(16)
►
September
(5)
►
August
(23)
►
July
(17)
►
June
(7)
►
May
(6)
►
April
(13)
►
March
(18)
►
February
(28)
►
January
(19)
►
2023
(243)
►
December
(15)
►
November
(13)
►
October
(17)
►
September
(19)
►
August
(16)
►
July
(18)
►
June
(22)
►
May
(18)
►
April
(26)
►
March
(32)
►
February
(24)
►
January
(23)
►
2022
(223)
►
December
(30)
►
November
(12)
►
October
(11)
►
September
(12)
►
August
(19)
►
July
(11)
►
June
(25)
►
May
(8)
►
April
(23)
►
March
(20)
►
February
(37)
►
January
(15)
►
2021
(260)
►
December
(8)
►
November
(10)
►
October
(41)
►
September
(86)
►
August
(69)
►
July
(2)
►
June
(2)
►
May
(6)
►
April
(12)
►
March
(1)
►
February
(14)
►
January
(9)
►
2020
(220)
►
December
(27)
►
November
(8)
►
October
(17)
►
September
(32)
►
August
(26)
►
July
(12)
►
June
(17)
►
May
(15)
►
April
(13)
►
March
(19)
►
February
(20)
►
January
(14)
►
2019
(289)
►
December
(21)
►
November
(11)
►
October
(20)
►
September
(27)
►
August
(37)
►
July
(21)
►
June
(20)
►
May
(28)
►
April
(39)
►
March
(25)
►
February
(29)
►
January
(11)
►
2018
(225)
►
December
(14)
►
November
(17)
►
October
(12)
►
September
(16)
►
August
(26)
►
July
(12)
►
June
(18)
►
May
(22)
►
April
(29)
►
March
(19)
►
February
(27)
►
January
(13)
►
2017
(334)
►
December
(18)
►
November
(15)
►
October
(21)
►
September
(20)
►
August
(33)
►
July
(21)
►
June
(26)
►
May
(24)
►
April
(36)
►
March
(48)
►
February
(41)
►
January
(31)
►
2016
(402)
►
December
(30)
►
November
(35)
►
October
(35)
►
September
(32)
►
August
(34)
►
July
(22)
►
June
(39)
►
May
(49)
►
April
(31)
►
March
(33)
►
February
(35)
►
January
(27)
►
2015
(446)
►
December
(26)
►
November
(29)
►
October
(37)
►
September
(37)
►
August
(32)
►
July
(37)
►
June
(38)
►
May
(40)
►
April
(51)
►
March
(44)
►
February
(45)
►
January
(30)
►
2014
(518)
►
December
(38)
►
November
(25)
►
October
(29)
►
September
(48)
►
August
(47)
►
July
(38)
►
June
(45)
►
May
(32)
►
April
(48)
►
March
(60)
►
February
(45)
►
January
(63)
▼
2013
(572)
▼
December
(46)
Taking on notorious criminal's persona is protecte...
Irrationally sexist advertising
House brands in Australia
Firm that refers instead of represents might be fa...
Leading survey questions
Genderswapping Bilbo Baggins
fleeting uses in documentaries are fair, 4th Circu...
Domain names in the news: political scandal edition
The ASA and ads for offensive products
"Natural" plus green imagery not puffery for diape...
FCC regulation doesn't preempt action against wire...
The TPP and termination rights
Descriptive or nominative?
plaintiff not enough of a competitor to win false ...
soy and almond milk couldn't deceive reasonable co...
PTO/NTIA online transactions
PTO/NTIA access to rights information
PTO/NTIA: notice and takedown
PTO/NTIA: Maria Pallante
PTO/NTIA: remix
PTO/NTIA hearing: first sale
PTO/NTIA Green Paper Hearing, statutory damages
Trademark twofer
A story about creativity and standing on the shoul...
Briefly noted: consumers challenging express subst...
Uber's "tips included" claims lead to driver lawsuit
Trader Joe's versus HT Traders from Harris Teeter
TM infringement no matter how dissimilar the marks?
Learned intermediary doctrine doesn't bar claim at...
Get used to disappointment
PTO/NTIA Green Paper public meeting agenda
competitor can challenge allegedly confusing use o...
software is a "good" but California claims still fail
9th Circuit resoundingly rejects presumption of ir...
Dilution is more than association: but what more?
Blurred lines, part 3
Blurred lines: really part 2 this time
Blurred Lines: Advertising or Content? An FTC Work...
perils of automated recommendation ads
AU’s post-argument panel on Lexmark v. Static Control
A song about big data
Eric Goldman previews Lexmark
eBay seller loses gray goods case
lawyer who doesn't mediate lacks standing against ...
distributor's switch to direct sourcing leads to L...
Publisher can't maintain Lanham Act claim against ...
►
November
(36)
►
October
(37)
►
September
(48)
►
August
(52)
►
July
(38)
►
June
(36)
►
May
(56)
►
April
(59)
►
March
(73)
►
February
(41)
►
January
(50)
►
2012
(598)
►
December
(56)
►
November
(41)
►
October
(48)
►
September
(56)
►
August
(53)
►
July
(62)
►
June
(62)
►
May
(69)
►
April
(45)
►
March
(42)
►
February
(33)
►
January
(31)
►
2011
(430)
►
December
(35)
►
November
(40)
►
October
(39)
►
September
(41)
►
August
(59)
►
July
(36)
►
June
(25)
►
May
(36)
►
April
(40)
►
March
(31)
►
February
(17)
►
January
(31)
►
2010
(312)
►
December
(25)
►
November
(37)
►
October
(16)
►
September
(34)
►
August
(28)
►
July
(19)
►
June
(30)
►
May
(26)
►
April
(35)
►
March
(27)
►
February
(10)
►
January
(25)
►
2009
(392)
►
December
(25)
►
November
(45)
►
October
(42)
►
September
(23)
►
August
(43)
►
July
(39)
►
June
(22)
►
May
(28)
►
April
(37)
►
March
(39)
►
February
(22)
►
January
(27)
►
2008
(359)
►
December
(25)
►
November
(20)
►
October
(34)
►
September
(18)
►
August
(33)
►
July
(29)
►
June
(22)
►
May
(42)
►
April
(41)
►
March
(49)
►
February
(30)
►
January
(16)
►
2007
(380)
►
December
(22)
►
November
(38)
►
October
(50)
►
September
(34)
►
August
(39)
►
July
(32)
►
June
(29)
►
May
(20)
►
April
(23)
►
March
(30)
►
February
(40)
►
January
(23)
►
2006
(336)
►
December
(32)
►
November
(16)
►
October
(34)
►
September
(22)
►
August
(45)
►
July
(34)
►
June
(21)
►
May
(20)
►
April
(11)
►
March
(42)
►
February
(13)
►
January
(46)
►
2005
(50)
►
December
(13)
►
November
(14)
►
October
(1)
►
September
(2)
►
August
(3)
►
July
(2)
►
June
(6)
►
May
(1)
►
April
(1)
►
March
(2)
►
February
(3)
►
January
(2)
►
2004
(14)
►
December
(3)
►
November
(9)
►
October
(2)
►
2003
(9)
►
December
(1)
►
November
(2)
►
October
(1)
►
September
(5)
Labels
1201
(19)
1202
(2)
230
(96)
acpa
(16)
advertising
(283)
antitrust
(49)
arbitration
(3)
art law
(36)
attribution
(28)
b
(1)
blogging
(23)
california
(536)
can-spam
(1)
cfaa
(12)
cfps
(48)
class actions
(277)
cmi
(19)
comics
(37)
commercial speech
(269)
conferences
(917)
consumer protection
(948)
content moderation
(3)
contracts
(100)
copying
(195)
copyright
(1657)
counterfeiting
(1)
creative commons
(12)
cultural property
(10)
cybersquatting
(1)
damages
(159)
dastar
(196)
defamation
(203)
derivative works
(2)
design patent
(57)
dilution
(257)
disclosures
(96)
disparagement
(29)
dmca
(203)
drm
(72)
evidence
(1)
false advertising
(3079)
false association
(12)
false designation of origin
(6)
false endorsement
(13)
fan fiction
(87)
fanworks
(190)
fda
(273)
fees
(35)
first amendment
(442)
ftc
(184)
g
(1)
geographic indications
(43)
go
(1)
google
(89)
insurance
(72)
interviews
(5)
jobs
(2)
jurisdiction
(5)
libraries
(18)
misappropriation
(10)
moral rights
(18)
music
(136)
my lawsuits
(16)
my writings
(114)
net neutrality
(5)
parody
(27)
patent
(224)
patents
(136)
peer production
(27)
preclusion
(1)
preemption
(268)
presentations
(118)
privacy
(113)
procedure
(145)
property
(18)
reading list
(308)
remedies
(275)
right of publicity
(264)
secondary liability
(178)
securities
(8)
standing
(354)
surveys
(106)
teaching
(38)
tortious interference
(116)
trade secrets
(81)
trademark
(2042)
traditional knowledge
(11)
unconscionability
(5)
unfairness
(62)
warranties
(14)
Things I've read
My Library
at
LibraryThing
No comments:
Post a Comment