- Wednesday, February 20, 2013, 19:09
- CyberLaw, Internet
Posting by confused consumer was not hearsay. You Fit, Inc. v. Pleasanton Fitness, LLC, 2013 WL 521784 (M.D.Fla. February 11, 2013) In a trademark case between competing health clubs, the court considered a Yelp posting in entering a preliminary injunction, finding that while the anonymous posts were not conclusive evidence of actual confusion, they were
Full story
- Monday, October 8, 2012, 3:43
- CyberLaw, Internet
Eagle v. Morgan, 2012 WL 4739436 (E.D.Pa. October 4, 2012) After plaintiff was fired as an executive, her former employer (using the password known by another employee) took over plaintiff’s LinkedIn account. It kept all of plaintiff’s contacts and recommendations but switched out plaintiff’s name and photo with those of the new CEO. Plaintiff sued
Full story
- Thursday, February 2, 2012, 6:55
- Copyright, CyberLaw, Internet
Patent trolls, open source, do not track, SOPA, PIPA and much, much more: Facebook’s IPO filing has a real zoo of issues. The securities laws require that companies going public identify risk factors that could adversely affect the company’s stock. Facebook’s S-1 filing, which it sent to the SEC today, identified almost 40 such factors.
Full story
- Tuesday, December 20, 2011, 18:32
- CyberLaw, Internet
Ascentive, LLC v. Opinion Corp., 2001 WL 6181452 (E.D.N.Y. December 13, 2011) Plaintiffs sued gripe site pissedconsumer.com for trademark infringement and other forms of unfair competition. The court denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. It found, among other things, that defendants’ use of plaintiffs’ trademarks as subdomains (e.g., ascentive.pissedconsumer.com) was not likely to cause confusion.
Full story
- Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:42
- CyberLaw, Internet
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. v. Chipotles Grill of Jonesboro, Inc., 2011 WL 2292357 (E.D. Ark. June 9, 2011) The awesome burrito place Chipotle sued another restaurant that called itself Chipotles for trademark infringement. Plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction. The court granted the motion. One of the most important factors in the court’s decision to grant
Full story
- Saturday, June 11, 2011, 19:34
- CyberLaw, Internet
Scooter Store, Inc. v. Spinlife.com, LLC, 2011 WL 2160462 (S.D. Ohio June 1, 2011) The Scooter Store and a related company sued a competitor for trademark infringement and other causes of action for unfair competition based in part on the competitor’s purchase of keywords such as “scooter store” and “your scooter store” to trigger sponsored
Full story
- Sunday, May 8, 2011, 22:07
- CyberLaw, Internet
Case dismissed because federal court in California did not have personal jurisdiction over Illinois resident. Facebook, Inc. v. Teachbook.com, LLC, 2011 WL 1672464 (N.D.Cal. May 3, 2011) Last year Facebook made us wonder if it had gone off its meds when it filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Illinois-based Teachbook.com. More than one commentator thought
Full story
- Monday, December 13, 2010, 3:01
- CyberLaw, Internet
Black Sheep Television, Ltd. v. Town of Islip, 2010 WL 4961669 (E.D.N.Y., December 6, 2010) The Long Island Macarthur Airport is in a dispute with a company over that company’s alleged cybersquatting and the creation of websites that apparently a number of people have confused with the airport’s official marketing efforts. That company has also
Full story
- Friday, October 8, 2010, 5:28
- CyberLaw, Internet
Stayart v. Yahoo, — F.3d —, 2010 WL 3785147 (September 30, 2010) Plaintiff performed a vanity search of her own name on Yahoo and found some results on porn and pharmaceutical sites. When Yahoo would not remove the search results upon plaintiff’s request, plaintiff sued under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. She claimed that
Full story
- Wednesday, May 12, 2010, 22:03
- CyberLaw, Internet
Arizona State Trailer Sales, Inc. d/b/a Little Dealer Little Prices RV v. World Wide RV, No. FA1003001315658 (Nat’l Arb. Forum, May 7, 2010)
Startups in the process of selecting a company or product name are often frustrated to see that someone else, years ago, registered the .com version of their newly thought-of name. Similarly, companies
Full story