We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 92

First Amendment protects use of third-party’s trademark in video game
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • December 30 2014

Confirming that video games, including customizable multi-player games, qualify as expressive works entitled to First Amendment protection, a


Microsoft’s “SkyDrive” held to infringe Sky’s UK and Community trade marks
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • July 31 2013

On 28 June 2013, the High Court of England and Wales held in British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and others v Microsoft Corporation and another 2013


No presumption, but inference of irreparable harm permissible under Lanham Act
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 29 2015

Addressing interpretation of advertising claims when the packaging or label unambiguously defines a claim term and an inference of irreparable harm


FreemantleMedia Ltd and 19 TV Ltd (MODEL IDOL and POP IDOL): moderately similar marks and likelihood of confusion
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • September 28 2010

In June 2010, the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO) issued its decision in FreemantleMedia Ltd and 19 TV Ltd v James Fleming BL O 205 10


Formula One Licensing BV v OHIM: losing distinctiveness
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • March 31 2011

In Formula One Licensing BV v OHIM 2011 unreported, the General Court of the European Union has held that the combination of "F" and "1" would be perceived as an abbreviation of "Formula 1" and descriptive of racing cars and races


Proof of confusion essential for trademark injunction
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

Addressing the likelihood of success requirement for injunctive relief, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit vacated an order requiring


Disparagement Proscription of 2(a) Is Unconstitutional
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 29 2016

In the last several decades, the disparagement provision of 2(a) of the Lanham Act has become a more frequent basis for rejection or Cancellation


Federal Circuit: Disparagement Proscription of 2(a) of the Lanham Act Unconstitutional
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • December 28 2015

In the last several decades, the disparagement provision of 2(a) of the Lanham Act has become a more frequent basis for rejection or cancellation of


Once and for all, the Pooh belongs to Disney
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 31 2013

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's (the Board


Applause can come with a big price tag
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • March 31 2014

Paying tribute to celebrity can sometimes be an expensive proposition. A Chicago grocery store chain found this out the hard way when the U.S. Court