Wed, 27 Jun 2006 15:52:00 EST
An unprecedented case in French court of appeals last February held that scents are qualified for protection under copyright laws. In L'Oreal vs. Bellure N.V., Bellure was held liable for copying a number of L'Oreal's fragrances. This lead the way for another such case in the Dutch Supreme Court earlier this month where L'Oreal sought to disgorge profits from Kecofa's knockoff scents, and won. Should scents really be considered works of art, do their creators orchestrate scents with 'notes' of diverse fragrances?
Wed, 27 Jun 2006 14:47:00 EST
'A Paris appeals court is expected to issue a ruling Wednesday in a closely watched trademark violation case in which Louis Vuitton Malletier, a unit of LVMH, won an earlier round against Google. The Internet search company was ordered last year to pay Vuitton ?200,000, or $250,000, for trademark counterfeiting, unfair competition and misleading advertising.'
Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:36:00 EST
2006-06-27 Quality Control Stats
Wed, 21 Jun 2006 7:43:00 EST
2006-06-20 Quality Control Stats
Thu, 16 Jun 2006 16:35:00 EST
JP Enterprises filed a suit against Yahoo on the basis that Yahoo used it's trademark, lovecity.com, as a keyword in it's Google AdWords. This had the effect of advertising for dating websites owned by Yahoo and two other companies whenever someone searched for lovecity. JP Enterprises says that this is a deliberate misuse of its trademark. However, whether it causes confusion might be a bigger factor in this case.
Tue, 15 Jun 2006 13:15:00 EST
The second revision to the CDNameSearch 8.5 User Manual has been published.
Tue, 15 Jun 2006 13:10:00 EST
Firasat M. Ali and Arturo E. Sandoval report that on the 12th of April 2006, the United States Supreme Court approved new amendments and rules to the Federal Rules of Appellate and Civil Procedure. Unless Congress enacts legislation to reject, modify or defer them, these amendments and rules will take effect on the 1st of December 2006.
Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:21:00 EST
2006-06-13 Quality Control Stats
Mon, 8 Jun 2006 14:25:00 EST
The Supreme Court gave its decisions on two cases on June 2nd, 2006 (Mattel, Inc. v. 3894207 Canada Inc., 2006 SCC 22 and Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin v. Boutiques Cliquot LtÚe, 2006 SCC 23). The fact that 'Barbie' and 'Veuve Clicquot' were famous marks was not enough to trump a similar mark in dissimilar goods, reports Duncan Bucknell.
Tue, 6 Jun 2006 14:43:00 EST
2006-06-06 Quality Control Stats