Willamette Law Online

(5 summaries)

Amanda Peterson

Intellectual Property

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Lambert Corp. v. LBJC Inc.Trademarks: To prevail on a claim for trademark infringement under the Lanham Act, Section 43(a), a plaintiff must prove: (1) ownership of a valid trademark; (2) use of the mark without its consent; and (3) that such use is likely to cause confusion. Even without a valid trademark registration, a trademark infringement plaintiff may still demonstrate superior rights to a trademark by establishing that it was the first user of the mark in commerce, however, such prior use must be “continuous,” and not merely “transitory.”(06-16-2014)
Mister Softee, Inc. v. TsirkosTrademarks: In a trademark infringement case, courts look to an eight-part test that determines whether customer confusion will occur due to the infringement that will damage business for the senior user. (06-05-2014)
Home Gambling Network, Inc. v. PichePatents: In patent infringement cases, the award of attorneys' fees is reserved for “exceptional cases”; if the infringement is premised on operations that are outside of the United States, the claim cannot be successful and is likely subject to an award of attorneys’ fees. (05-22-2014)
Whipps, Inc. v. Ross Valve Mfg. Co. Trade Secrets: Trade Secrets: Preliminary Injunction: An idea may still be held to be a trade secret, despite not being written down or having written design plans, if a sufficiently detailed description of the design is provided to others. (05-08-2014)
Cohen v. Versatile Studios, Inc. Copyright: Cases that hinge on whether a copyrighted work was created as a ‘work made for hire’ or as independent are ownership disputes that arise under the Copyright Act.(04-21-2014)