Domain Name Lawsuits Are Stupid (and the Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine Is Too)--Wooster Floral v. Green Thumb

This case concerns the domain name WoosterFloral.com. It was initially owned by Wooster Floral, a florist in Wooster, Ohio. However, in 2014, the owner wound down the business and didn’t renew the domain name. The store manager then bought out…

Jury Will Decide If Videogame Character Infringes a Wrestling Persona--GI Bro v. Call of Duty

The plaintiff is a wrestler, primarily known as Booker T. When he wrestles for WWE, he used the stage name G.I. Bro. There’s also a comic book line based on the G.I. Bro character. The defendant makes the Call of…

CDT Lacks Standing to Challenge Trump's Anti-230 Executive Order

In May, Trump issued an executive order designed to destroy Section 230 (EO 13925). Rather than actually work with Congress, Trump tried to amend 47 USC 230 only within the executive branch, which is largely a dead-end. I’m hoping Pres….

Yes, this is another defense-favorable fair use ruling produced by a Richard Liebowitz lawsuit. 🙏🙏🙏 The case relates to a construction site for a proposed new school, which may have sinkholes. This concern sparked substantial community debate. The plaintiff flew…

Can Influencers' Failure to Disclose Sponsorship Constitute False Advertising?--EIS v. WOW Tech (Guest Blog Post)

by guest blogger Prof. Alexandra J. Roberts This decision has everything—from sex toys with proprietary air pulse technology to Instagram influencers and Amazon astroturfing to illicit meetings inside the sauna of a well-known Las Vegas hotel.  Most exciting for this…

A Rare Case of a Judge Relying on the Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine (Boo)--Nike v. Warren Lotas

This case involves Warren Lotas sneakers that claimed to reinterpret one of Nike’s allegedly iconic sneaker stylings. The Fashion Law summarized the case, including this depiction: The sneaker similarities are obvious, which isn’t surprising because Warren Lotas styled its product…

This is one of several pending cases against Craigslist for its alleged role in facilitating sex trafficking before 2010. In this case, the district court held that Section 230(c)(1) immunized the plaintiff’s state law claims. The plaintiff sought reconsideration due…

[This op-ed ran in the San Francisco Chronicle on December 8, 2020. I co-authored it with my colleague Irina Raicu from SCU’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. Irina and I don’t agree on very much, so it’s always a mitzvah…

CRM Software Vendor Didn't Qualify for Section 230--Tan v. Konnektive

This is a complex consumer protection lawsuit with dozens of defendants. This early-stage opinion is 62 pages. The case involves allegedly bogus “free trial” programs for cosmetics. The plaintiff alleges that she was duped into signing up for a free…

Court Again Enjoins Anti-TikTok Executive Order--TikTok v. US

This is another ruling involving Trump’s efforts to kick TikTok and WeChat out of the United States. This court, interpreting the authorizing statute, previously partially enjoined the Secretary of Commerce’s implementation of the anti-TikTok executive order. Again relying exclusively on…