Alyssa Little

Intellectual Property (12 summaries)

Bulldog N.Y. LLC v. Pepsico, Inc.

When one company markets its sole product to another company in the hopes of exposing the product to the public, the marketing company will lose its protection as a trade secret.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets
  • , Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

Commonwealth v. Eiseman

To the extent capitation rates constitute trade secrets, that information may be redacted in accordance with the Trade Secrets Act which protects against misappropriation of trade secrets, including disclosure without consent.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets
  • , Disclosure

Van Praagh v. Gratton

Although personal names used as trademarks are generally regarded as descriptive terms, the court found that they are protected if, through usage, they acquire distinctiveness and a secondary meaning. Because a name was found to be protected, the onus was on the second person trying to use it to avoid mistake.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks
  • , Trademarks on Personal Names

Inhale, Inc. v. Starbuzz Tobacco

The design of a useful article is copyrightable only to the extent that it incorporates sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of utilitarian aspects of the container.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright
  • , Useful article

Modus LLC v. Encore Legal Solutions, Inc.

The court did not grant a declaratory judgment in favor of a new employer when employees from another company brought trade secrets to the new company.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets
  • , Misappropriation

Kenney v. Warner Bros. Entm't, Inc.

The plaintiff must show that defendant has copied elements of his copyrighted work and that the copying is actionable by proving that the copying of the copyrighted material was so extensive that it rendered the infringing and copyrighted works substantially material.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks
  • , Trademark promotion

Seven Arts Filmed Entm't, Ltd. v. Content Media Corp. PLC

Where a copyright ownership claim was time-barred, and ownership was the deciding issue, the related infringement claims failed.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright
  • , Statute of Limitations

Avery Dennison Corp. v. Transact Techs., Inc.

An injunction was not granted when the plaintiff failed to carry the burden of proof that the defendant used trade secrets in developing a machine.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets
  • , Injunctive Relief

Churchill Downs, Inc. v. Commemorative Derby Promotions

Having a prior, expired licensing agreement contributed to the finding of a likelihood of confusion in determining trademark infringement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks
  • , Lanham Act

Fox TV Stations, Inc. v. FilmOn X LLC

Even if each consumer has an individual antenna, transmission of live TV by a commercial company violates the Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act of 1976.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright
  • , Transmit Clause of the Copyright Act

All Am. Semiconductor v. Apx Tech. Corp. (Unpublished)

A plaintiff must establish ownership of a trade secret in a design by identifying a specific secret that meets the elements to be protected by law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets
  • , Ownership of Technology

Craigslist Inc. v. 3Taps Inc.

A party can only sue for copyright infringement if it has an exclusive license or ownership interest. Such an interest can be evidenced by a writing that shows a parties' intent to transfer the copyright to the moving party.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright
  • , Infringement