Trademark Law Briefs

a summary of recent 9th Circuit trademark decisions

Archive for the ‘First Amendment’ Category

Trade Association Certification is not Protected Speech

Tuesday, May 11th, 2010

All One God Faith, Inc. v. Organic and Sustainable Industry Standards, Inc. (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 1186

Plaintiff, (trade name “Dr. Bonner”) sells organic health and beauty products that comply with the voluntary standards of the USDA National Organic Program (NOP).  Defendant (”OASIS”) is a mutual benefit trade group who is designing its own organic standard to be used as a certification on member products.  Dr. Bonner filed suit seeking an injunction against OASIS based on unfair competition and misleading advertising because Dr. Bonner alleges the OASIS standards do not meet the NOP standards.  OASIS filed a anti-slapp motion claiming the complaint attacks its free speech activitie.  The trial court denied the motion and the Court of Appeal affirmed. (more…)

Posted in California law, First Amendment | 1 Comment »

Parody of political opponent’s mark covered by free speech

Tuesday, February 9th, 2010

ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8 v. Courage Campaign, 2010 U.S. Dist. 10045 (E.D. Cal., 2010)

Plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction based on trademark infringement.  The court denied the injunction, holding that Plaintiff was “unlikely to overcome the conclusion that defendant’s use of the mark is protected under the first amendment, in that the use is relevant to an expressive parody and the use is not explicitly misleading.” (more…)

Posted in First Amendment, Injunction | No Comments »

Hallmark’s Anti-SLAPP motion against Hilton denied

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009

Hilton v. Hallmark 580 F.3d 874 (9th Cir. 2009)

Hallmark produced a card depicting a photograph of Paris Hilton’s head on a cartoon figure and using Hilton’s catchphrase “That’s Hot.”  Hilton sued Hallmark under several causes of action including California’s right to publicity law.  Hallmark moved to strike on Anti-SLAPP grounds.  The district court denied the motion and Hallmark appealled.  The Court of Appeals upheld the district court decision. (more…)

Posted in California law, First Amendment | No Comments »

Referring to famous people in product press releases- beware a false implication of endorsement

Thursday, July 3rd, 2008

Yeager v. Cingular Wireless LLC, 2008 US Dist. LEXIS 46449 (E.D. Cal. 2008) 

Ruling: Defendant’s motion to dismiss on first amendment grounds denied because the complaint plead facts on which defendant’s actions could be considered commercial speech.  Defendant’s claim that plaintiff’s achievements in breaking the sound barrier are within the public domain and therefore not subject to trademark law is unfounded because a false endorsement claim is actionable under the Lanham Act as plead by plaintiff.  Finally, defendant’s defenses regarding incidental use and permissible fair use are fact specific and therefore cannot be grounds to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint as a matter of law when plaintiff has plead sufficient facts.

(more…)

Posted in False Endorsement, First Amendment, likelihood of confusion | No Comments »

    Avatar Legal
  • You are currently browsing the archives for the First Amendment category.

  • Pages

    • About Avatar Legal, PC
    • about the author
  • Archives

    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
  • Categories

    • attorneys fees (7)
    • California law (10)
    • Cancellation (2)
    • Conflict of Interest (1)
    • consumer surveys (1)
    • Counterfeiting (7)
    • Cybersquatting (3)
    • Declaratory Action (2)
    • default judgment (6)
    • descriptive/suggestive (1)
    • dilution (3)
    • Discovery (4)
    • Distinctive (1)
    • Factual Analysis (6)
    • False Endorsement (2)
    • First Amendment (4)
    • First Sale (1)
    • Forum/Venue (2)
    • Functionality (3)
    • Genericism (4)
    • Injunction (5)
    • intent to use (1)
    • Jurisdiction (4)
    • Laches (5)
    • Licensing (4)
    • likelihood of confusion (10)
    • Procedure (6)
    • secondary meaning (6)
    • statutory damages (3)
    • trade dress (3)
    • Uncategorized (10)
    • Use (1)
    • Validity of Mark (4)

  • Syndication

    • RSS Feed
    • RSS
    • Atom
    • Comments RSS

Trademark Law Briefs is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).