Inflatable Giant Gorilla Attacks Google (for Copyright Infringement)–Scherba v. Google
…dress protection. * can Google take advantage of 17 USC 113(c)? Among other things, 113(c) allows retailers and distributors to take product shots of the goods they are selling and…
Keyword Ad and Product Shots Case Survives Motion to Dismiss–FragranceNet v. FragranceX
…court directed the defendant to answer the complaint. Copyright in Product Shots FragranceNet claims that FragranceX copied 900+ product shots from FragranceNet’s website and republished them verbatim on the FragranceX…
Online Resale of Expired Cosmetics May Be Trademark Infringement–Mary Kay v. Weber
…in 2005, ordering them to change their e-commerce site’s name (so that it didn’t reference Mary Kay) and remove any copyrighted product shots. The parties dispute this conversation; the defendants…
September 2008 Quick Links, Part 2
…damages for the copyright infringement. In the final ruling, the court enjoins cutting and pasting product shots but allows the defendant to recreate the product shots. Ronald Coleman has more…
July 2008 Quick Links, Part I (IP Edition)
…see the Gregerson case. * An update on Designer Skin v. S&L Vitamins. You may recall that S&L Vitamins lifted product shots from Designer Skins, and in the previous ruling,…
Keyword Metatags and Keyword-Triggered Ads Don’t Create Initial Interest Confusion–Designer Skin v. S&L Vitamins
…including trademark infringement and dilution, copyright infringement for displaying product shots, interference with contract and other related claims. Trademark Infringement With respect to trademark infringement, the plaintiff only complained about…
Court Says Keyword Metatags Don’t Matter–Standard Process v. Banks
…product shots and included a prominent disclaimer. In contrast, consumers may be confused by the defendant’s emails touting the products when the emails included product shots but didn’t have a…
Yet Another NY Court Says Keyword Ads & Metatags Aren’t TM Use in Commerce–S&L Vitamins v. Australian Gold
…claimed that S&L violated its copyrights in its labels by taking the product shots. This is an obviously spurious claim because after-market product shots are exactly what 17 USC 113(c)…
July 2007 Quick Links, Part I
…(S.D.Cal. April 13, 2007). Oh man, what a crazy lawsuit. Freelancer takes product shot of hotel and licenses photo to hotel. Hotel then provides photo to third party websites (such…