A Massive Roundup of Section 230 Decisions
This post also owes its origins to my 2-week trip to China in June. Section 230 decisions started backing up while I was on the trip and never stopped accruing. In total, this post covers about 30 decisions in 7k+…
Schedule A: Ten Notable Developments in 2025 (Guest Blog Post)
By Sarah Fackrell, Professor of Law at Chicago-Kent College of Law It’s been a busy year on the Schedule A beat. In reflecting on the year, I’ve put together this quick round-up of ten of the top developments, in (rough)…
Post-Mortem of a Misguided Logo Trademark Lawsuit–LegalForce v. Internet Brands
The plaintiff in this case is LegalForce, Raj Abhyanker CEO, which run the notorious trademark registration operation Trademarkia. How notorious? Trademarkia’s own web site has a page entitled “Is Trademarkia a Scam? Debunking Hearsay,” which brings to mind the old…
Second Circuit Rejects Email Service on Chinese Defendants in Baby Shark SAD Scheme Case
This case involves the “Baby Shark” earworm song, which has billions of YouTube views and ranks as the #1 most viewed YouTube video of all time. You already know the lyrics (and associated hand/arm movements) by heart, but the high-quality…
11th Circuit Sidesteps the SAD Scheme’s Problems–Ain Jeem v. Schedule A
The plaintiff enforces Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s IP rights. It is indeed “sad” to see a living legend like Kareem degrade his legacy by participating in a bottom-feeding operation like the SAD Scheme. The plaintiff filed a SAD Scheme case in 2021…
Another Shill Article Tries to Normalize the SAD Scheme
I note the posting of a draft article, which (unfortunately) has been accepted for publication by the Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, entitled “Beyond the Brick-and-Mortar Paradigm: The Legal and Procedural Foundations of Schedule A Litigation in…
The Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine Refuses to Die
Continuing my recent critical coverage of the initial interest confusion doctrine, here are a few more rulings on the subject. Hoffmann Brothers Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Hoffmann Air Conditioning & Heating, LLC, 2025 WL 2587109 (8th Cir. Sept….
‘Initial Interest Confusion’ Is More of a Vibe Than a Credible Legal Doctrine–Penn State v. Vintage Brand
This is a merchandise “counterfeiting” case. In a prior ruling in this case, a “jury determined that Defendants had willfully violated Penn State’s trademark and awarded Penn State $28,000 in compensatory damages.” The defendants challenged the jury results, including Penn…
Using a Meme in Your Advertising? Clear the Publicity Rights–FJerry v. Oasis Energy
This case involves a photo from the “Dude With Sign” meme series, featuring Seth Phillips in the titular role: An advertiser, Oasis Energy, modified the meme to promote its offerings in two social media posts: FJerry owns both the copyright…
SAD Scheme Cases Are a Cesspool of IP Owner Overreaches–Nike v. Quanzhou Yiyi Shoe Industry
As part of their overall proclivity towards rights accretion, IP owners routinely stretch legal doctrines and request overreaching remedies. When IP owners proceed in court without opposition, they sometimes get away with those overreaches. But when a judge calls out…