“A federal judge recently ruled that the owner of Entrepreneur Magazine, a small-business publication with about 2 million readers nationwide, has … ‘exclusive right to use the mark in commerce.’ … So you can call yourself an entrepreneur, but if you want to include the word in the name of your business — particularly one in publishing — look out.” This summer, the court “awarded Entrepreneur Media a permanent injunction and $669,656 in damages” against Scott Smith, who ran a public relations firm called Entrepreneur PR. The court accepted the media company’s contention that Smith intentionally infringed on the trademark, “attempting to affiliate his firm with the magazine and feed off its popularity.” (Christine Van Dusen, “‘Entrepreneur’ a trademarked word, court rules”, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Aug. 20; article and court opinion at magazine site; Janet Attard, “Business Information and Ideas To Go”, BusinessKnowHow.com, undated; Smith’s response; Scott Allen, “What’s in a Name?”, About.com, undated; Steve Strauss, “Playing the Name Game”, USA Today, Jul. 10, 2002 (earlier 9th Circuit ruling favorable to Smith); Peter I. Hupalo, “Entrepreneur: The Soap Opera Continues”, Thinking Like an Entrepreneur, undated). Scott is now appealing (“What’s in a Name?”, FreshInc., Aug. 14). On Nov. 1, 2001 we covered the magazine’s efforts to enforce its trademark against a different (and unrelated) defendant, the proprietors of the website Entrepreneurs.com.
Archive for August, 2003
Update: Calif. local govts. settle with gun dealers
Another portion of the municipal gun-suit campaign is ending with a whimper, not a bang: San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office has announced a tentative settlement of litigation by California local governments against several gun dealers and distributors. If the deal is approved by the 12 governments and a San Diego judge, the dealers and distributors would change certain business practices and pay the plaintiff governments $70,000 — far less than the $2 million the governments are estimated to have racked up thus far in legal expenses, even though the suits have been touted in the past as a moneymaking proposition. “Earlier this year, San Diego Superior Court Judge Vincent DiFiglia granted summary judgment in favor of about 20 manufacturers and trade associations, including big-name companies such as Beretta and Smith & Wesson, Clements said. The plaintiff jurisdictions have appealed that decision. But the five dealers and distributors were to face a trial.”
Children and the Law
This is a trifle off-topic, but a pair of posts by Amanda Butler highlight some intriguing issues about the way the law treats children, an issue I touched on briefly in a previous post on voting ages. Here is one post on Patrick Kennedy, sentenced to death for raping a child, and here is another, about a decision by the Missouri Supreme Court that it is unconstitutional to execute murderers under the age of 18.
News from Far Off
Down Under, Victoria’s Attorney General has come out in favor of a pretty far-reaching set of legal reforms designed to protect consumers:
While it is appropriate that justice is blind, that does not mean the Bracks Government is blind to the needs of the Victorian public.
A streetcar named excessive
New Orleans: “The city’s public transit system should pay $51.4 million to the family of an 11-year-old girl whose arm was crushed beneath the wheels of a streetcar after she fell out of a window five years ago, a jury has decided.” A lawyer for the regional transit authority argued in vain that if the girl’s parents had been supervising her adequately she would not have fallen out of the streetcar window in the first place. (“Girl wins $51.4 million for streetcar accident”, AP/New Orleans Times-Picayune, Aug. 29). Ernest Svenson (Ernie the Attorney) writes to add that the printed edition of the newspaper contains the following passage, absent from the currently online version: “After the verdict was rendered a partylike atmosphere prevailed in the hallways outside Judge C. Hunter King’s courtroom, where jurors posed for photographs with [winning lawyer Johnnie] Cochran and the judge.” And he (Svenson) adds: “Which is nice, because that sort of thing is guaranteed to enhance public perception of our judicial system.” Addendum: the fuller version of the newspaper story is now online. Update Sept. 15: more about Judge King. Further update Oct. 25: Judge King removed from bench.
UK: “Ex-Pc wins ?87,000 for trauma”
If he wanted to avoid emotional trauma, maybe he chose the wrong line of work? From Glasgow, Scotland: “A former policeman who sued a widower because he experienced the trauma of seeing the man’s wife die in a crash with his speeding patrol car has won ?87,275 damages. George Gilfillan was awarded the money even though a judge ruled that he was driving ‘much too fast’ and said that he was 50 per cent to blame.” The court also awarded the widower ?16,000 in a counterclaim. (Tom Peterkin, Daily Telegraph, Aug. 13).
UK: “Ex-Pc wins ?87,000 for trauma”
If he wanted to avoid emotional trauma, maybe he chose the wrong line of work? From Glasgow, Scotland: “A former policeman who sued a widower because he experienced the trauma of seeing the man’s wife die in a crash with his speeding patrol car has won ?87,275 damages. George Gilfillan was awarded the money even though a judge ruled that he was driving ‘much too fast’ and said that he was 50 per cent to blame.” The court also awarded the widower ?16,000 in a counterclaim. (Tom Peterkin, Daily Telegraph, Aug. 13).
UK: “Ex-Pc wins ?87,000 for trauma”
If he wanted to avoid emotional trauma, maybe he chose the wrong line of work? From Glasgow, Scotland: “A former policeman who sued a widower because he experienced the trauma of seeing the man’s wife die in a crash with his speeding patrol car has won ?87,275 damages. George Gilfillan was awarded the money even though a judge ruled that he was driving ‘much too fast’ and said that he was 50 per cent to blame.” The court also awarded the widower ?16,000 in a counterclaim. (Tom Peterkin, Daily Telegraph, Aug. 13).
UK: “Ex-Pc wins ?87,000 for trauma”
If he wanted to avoid emotional trauma, maybe he chose the wrong line of work? From Glasgow, Scotland: “A former policeman who sued a widower because he experienced the trauma of seeing the man’s wife die in a crash with his speeding patrol car has won ?87,275 damages. George Gilfillan was awarded the money even though a judge ruled that he was driving ‘much too fast’ and said that he was 50 per cent to blame.” The court also awarded the widower ?16,000 in a counterclaim. (Tom Peterkin, Daily Telegraph, Aug. 13).
UK: “Ex-Pc wins ?87,000 for trauma”
If he wanted to avoid emotional trauma, maybe he chose the wrong line of work? From Glasgow, Scotland: “A former policeman who sued a widower because he experienced the trauma of seeing the man’s wife die in a crash with his speeding patrol car has won ?87,275 damages. George Gilfillan was awarded the money even though a judge ruled that he was driving ‘much too fast’ and said that he was 50 per cent to blame.” The court also awarded the widower ?16,000 in a counterclaim. (Tom Peterkin, Daily Telegraph, Aug. 13).