Q2 2016 Quick Links, Part 1 (Intellectual Property)
…the low likelihood of confusion resulting from merely employing trademarked phrases in a non-customer facing environment, such behavior does not constitute trademark infringement. See, e.g., 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. Lens.com,…
Damages from Competitive Keyword Advertising Are “Vanishingly Small”
…1,000 impressions and 61 clicks. 800-JR Cigar v. GoTo.com: the search engine defendant generated $345 in revenue (not profit, just revenue) from the litigated terms. 1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com: Lens.com…
Trademark Owners Just Can’t Win Keyword Advertising Cases–EarthCam v. OxBlue
…the doctrine actually helped a plaintiff win a case; and to the extent other courts follow the 1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com ruling, we may never see another successful initial interest…
Is It Software? Is It a Service? It Matters for Trademark Registration Purposes
…on the software, and cancelled the registration. The decision is consistent with, and cites, the 2012 Federal Circuit decision in the long-running saga of Lens.com v. 1-800 Contacts. In Lens.com,…
It’s Illegal For Offline Retailers To Collect Email Addresses–Capp v. Nordstrom
…Beats Lawsuit Alleging Violation of California’s “Shine the Light” Privacy Statute — Boorstein v. Men’s Journal * “Electronically Printed” Does not Include Automated Merchant Email — Shlahtichman v. 1-800 Contacts…
2013 Internet Law Syllabus and Casebook Now Online
…General Steel v. Chumley and notes about 1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com, the financial futility of keyword litigation, and Tre Milano. Privacy. I added some definitions from the new COPPA regulations….
Tenth Circuit Kills the Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine–1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com
…in the ad copy. 1-800 Contacts sued Lens.com in 2007. In 2010, the district court destroyed 1-800 Contacts’ arguments, handing Lens.com a complete win. On appeal, the Tenth Circuit upholds…
Suing Over Keyword Advertising Is A Bad Business Decision For Trademark Owners–General Steel v. Chumley (Forbes Cross-Post)
…won summary judgment: J.G. Wentworth v. Settlement Funding (2007); Designer Skin v. S&L Vitamins (2008); 1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com (2010); Montana Camo v. Cabela’s (2011); Jurin v. Google (2012) (note:…
Suing Like It’s 2009: Parts.com Sues Google and Yahoo for Keyword Advertising
…outcome. This lawsuit fits a trend that I’ve mentioned before: trademark owners with crappy trademarks are often unusually pugnacious about enforcing their purported trademark rights. 1-800 Contacts is my premier…
California Supreme Court: Retail Privacy Statute Doesn’t Apply to Download Transactions – Apple v Superior Court (Krescent)
…Journal Beats Lawsuit Alleging Violation of California’s “Shine the Light” Privacy Statute — Boorstein v. Men’s Journal “Electronically Printed” Does not Include Automated Merchant Email — Shlahtichman v. 1-800 Contacts…