裁判所(COURTS IN JAPAN) 動画
1、岡正晶最高裁判所判事の講話動画、11:45
1、岡正晶最高裁判所判事の講話動画、11:45
로맨스 특별법
韓国ドラマ「ロマンス特別法」
恋愛下手な判事の不器用な初恋の行方を描くラブコメディで注目の若手俳優キム・ミンギュ、Apinkのパク・チョロン、アイドルグループ「VIXX」のヒョギが主演です。
韓国の裁判所としては、人気のドラマを通じて裁判所をもっと知ってほしいというところと思います。
続きを読む“大韓民国最高裁判所(Supreme Court of Korea)商標_動画(embedded/playlist) vol.4”
1.The Center of Global IP Dispute Resolution, IP HUB Court, Patent Court of Korea、4:49
続きを読む“大韓民国最高裁判所(Supreme Court of Korea)商標_動画(embedded) vol.3”
The Supreme Court sided with Booking.com on Tuesday, green-lighting the booking accommodations website to trademark the generic term associated with their domain name.
情報源: Booking.com wins key trademark case at the Supreme Court – CNNPolitics
On 30th June 2020 Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in United StatesPpatent and Trademark Office et al. v. Booking.comdealt with the issue of whether the combination of generic terms is also generic for the purpose of trademark registration. SCOTUS by an overwhelming majority (8 judges) held otherwise i.e. such combination is not generic in nature. The sole dissenting opinion was written by J Breyer who held respondent’s Trademark as generic in nature.
情報源: US Supreme Court On ‘generic.com’ Trademark: A Tale Of Missed Opportunities
The Supreme Court nixed a win for Marcel Fashions in its decades-long dispute with Lucky Brand, tossing a novel “defense preclusion” backed by the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
情報源: Justices Toss New Defense Preclusion in Lucky’s Trademark War (2)
Lucky Brand Dungarees Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group Inc. (SCOTUS-Toons), 1:01:53
If you know anything about law it is probably that you can’t trademark a generic name. But this week the US Supreme Court heard a case that introduces a fascinating wrinkle in that long-standing rule, courtesy of the internet.
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments for USPTO v. Booking via Teleconference | LIVE | NowThis, 2:17:39
For the first time in its 230 year history, the Supreme Court is broadcasting its oral arguments, which are happening via teleconference due to the COVID-19 outbreak.
Trademark owners don’t have to show infringers’ willfulness in order to win an award from their profits, a unanimous Supreme Court said.
情報源: Intent Not Required for Trademark Profit Award, High Court Says
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. (SCOTUS-Toons)
The Supreme Court may soon resolve a circuit split regarding the availability of a trademark infringer’s profits in the absence of willful infringement. United States Intellectual Property Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 9 Jan 2020
A company that makes watch fasteners will try to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to revive a $6.7 million jury award against Fossil Inc., arguing that negligence is enough to award profits in trademark infringement cases.
情報源: Battle Over Trademark Profit Awards to Play Out at Supreme Court
Romag’s Trademarks
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. (CAFC)
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to use a case involving Booking.com to consider whether businesses can get federal trademark protection for website names that center on a commonly used word.
情報源: Booking.com Case Gets Supreme Court Review in Trademark Test – Bloomberg
Booking.com – Be a Booker, 0:16
https://youtu.be/qUBCz9-reg4