Will the CJEU take a deep dive into the right of possession? The European Court of Justice will have to deal with this question following a reference from the German Federal Supreme Court (Decision of 23 January 2024 in Case I ZR 205/22). The detailed questions which the Court will have to answer are: …
We UK lawyers view with interest the developments in the “Brexit cases”, resulting in appeals to the CJEU in 3 cases, as discussed in various previous posts on this blog, the latest being the summary (here) of the AG opinion in the first case, BASMATI. The BASMATI case, and the related “Brexit cases” APE TEES…
The Fifth Circuit also added non-genuine bezels to the district court’s injunction to make it consistent with the district court’s other findings. In a trademark infringement case involving refurbished Rolex watches, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment insofar as it concluded that BeckerTime, the refurbisher, infringed Rolex’s…
On 25 January 2024 the CJEU issued the long-awaited judgement in the already famous AUDI case (C-334/22). This judgment confirms the possibility of Audi trade mark infringement in terms of the legal interpretation which will be further determined by a national court. The court ruled in AUDI’s favour, stating that a car manufacturer can prohibit…
In October 2023, the Danish Supreme Court ruled in a trademark case concerning the trademark “TREK”. In recent years the Danish Supreme Court has rarely dealt with trademark disputes (due to the relatively strict requirements of leave from the Appeals Permission Board to appeal a decision to the Supreme Court), making this case particularly interesting….
Whether referred to as image rights, personality rights, right of publicity, portrait rights or simply likeness, having control over the use of your “image” can be an important right that – in one way or another and to various degrees – is respected in most jurisdictions. This is particularly true for persons whose image has…
The parodist could not rely on First Amendment protection because it used the famous sneakers as a source identifier. The maker of a sneaker that parodied a famous brand of skateboard-friendly kicks was not entitled to First Amendment protection against a claim of trademark infringement because it used the trade dress of the original as…
Many of us who have done a PhD, remember that time around the beginning of the second year when anxiety and insecurity start substituting the passion and enthusiasm. We all needed a safe space and a friendly encouraging forum to reassure us that having your own research project is a worthwhile endeavour. To help inspire junior…
The marks are generic both as to “Carnival” and the geographic locations “St Thomas” and “Virgin Islands.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a lower court decision denying the Virgin Island Carnival Committee (“VICC”) preliminary injunction to enjoin the Virgin Island Department of Tourism from using the phrases “St. Thomas Carnival”…
If the third-party marks and opposer’s marks are identical, the opposer’s marks and the applicant’s marks are compared to see if they are identical or non-identical for identical goods or services. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal…
