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 88

Exotic dancing attire may be inherently distinctive, but the Chippendales "Cuffs & Collar" costume is not
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 28 2010

Addressing whether the well-known Chippendales "Cuffs & Collar" costume is inherently distinctive for adult entertainment services, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the refusal to register the mark, finding that the costume was not inherently distinctive, but is a "mere variant or refinement" of the Playboy Bunny costume


CJEU upholds decision rejecting CTM application for PHOTOS.COM
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • March 17 2014

In Getty Images (US) Inc v OHIM C-7013 P, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has upheld an EU General Court decision rejecting a


Standing Under Lanham Act Premised on Defendant’s Putative Conduct
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • April 28 2016

The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed a district court's application of the two-part test for prudential standing to bring a Lanham


Court of Justice of the European Union provides further guidance on circumstances in which keyword advertising constitutes trademark infringement
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • October 31 2011

The Court of Justice of the European Union has provided further guidance on circumstances in which use of a registered trademark as a keyword in internet advertising by a third party advertiser may constitute trademark infringement


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


A recall notice directed to “6 Hour” energy shots could constitute false advertising
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 31 2012

Addressing the issue of whether a recall notice issued by a competitor constituted false advertising and anti-competitive conduct in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed a district court’s judgment dismissing false advertising claims and affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Sherman Act claims


The Olympics, Paralympics and London Olympics Association Rights: remedies for infringement
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • November 30 2010

The Olympics, Paralympics and London Olympics Association Rights (Infringement Proceedings) Regulations 20102477 set out the remedial orders that a court can make, with effect from 8 November 2010, in relation to goods, materials or articles that infringe the London Olympics association right (LOAR


WIPO refuses to order the transfer of worldcup2011.com to the International Rugby Board
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • Global
  • January 12 2012

In Rugby World Cup Ltd v Andreas Gyrre WIPO D2011-1520 (1 November 2011) sole panellist Robert Badgely dismissed the complaint by the International Rugby Board (IRB) against ticket reseller Euroteam AS on the basis that the domain name could not be considered confusingly similar to the IRB’s trade marks RUGBY WORLD CUP and RUGBY WORLD CUP 2011, essentially because the dominant term “rugby” was lacking in the domain name


.xxx domain names to become available from September 2011
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • Global
  • June 15 2011

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers recently approved the use of the .xxx suffix as a top-level domain name space, to be used by the online adult entertainment industry


Extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act is California Dreamin’
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 27 2010

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit intervened in a battle between two “Beach Boys” involving Lanham Act claims and California right of publicity claims, concluding in a case in which the plaintiff alleged conduct occurring in Great Britain affected U.S. commerce