- “Spanish woman given jail term for tweeting jokes about Franco-era assassination” [The Guardian]
- If California Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s 15-felony complaint and arrest warrant against activist filmmakers David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt is a vendetta, it’s one motivated by speech. That’s serious [Jacob Sullum]
- “A.B. 1104 — a censorship bill so obviously unconstitutional, we had to double check that it was real.” [EFF on stalled California bill to ban “fake news,” introduced by Assemblymember Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park)] “Germany approves bill curbing online hate crime, fake news” [AP/Yahoo, earlier]
- “Another Free Speech Win In Libel Lawsuit Disguised As A Trademark Complaint” [Tim Cushing, TechDirt; criticism of doctor’s experimental treatment methods]
- Punching a hole out of Section 230: new “sex trafficking” bill could have far-reaching consequences for web content and platforms [Elizabeth Nolan Brown, Reason]
- One section of a Maine bill would bar state’s attorney general from investigations or prosecutions based on political speech [HP 0551; Kevin at Lowering the Bar is critical of bill]
Posts Tagged ‘trademarks’
Disparagement perfected: Cato brief in Lee v. Tam
Did Cato just file the most not-safe-for-work amicus brief in Supreme Court history? It’s on the question (Lee v. Tam) of whether the government can deny trademark protection to words and phrases that are slurs and, in so doing, gather to itself the task of defining what is a slur. The case, involving the Asian-American band The Slants, is widely seen as foreshadowing the eventual outcome of the challenge to the Washington Redskins’ trademark.
Joining Cato as amici: humorist and Cato fellow P.J. O’Rourke; Profs. Nadine Strossen, Clay Calvert, and Erik Nielson; the Reason Foundation; Frederick, Md.’s Flying Dog Brewery and famed artist Ralph Steadman, whose work adorns its labels; and the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. It’s signed by Ilya Shapiro and Thomas Berry and written with Trevor Burrus’s assistance.
NSFW warning: as hinted, this brief uses obscene and disparaging words and phrases by the dozens and dozens, so be forewarned.
Supreme Court roundup
- Supreme Court will hear “Slants” trademark case, which could prove relevant to Washington Redskins controversy [Eugene Volokh on Lee v. Tam]
- Ooh: Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley says SCOTUS vacancy being “stolen” which “delegitimizes” any nominee [Roger Pilon] More on President-elect Trump and the Supreme Court: Jeffrey Rosen/Politico, Josh Blackman/National Review;
- “Whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction to review an order denying class certification after the named plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss their claims with prejudice.” [Microsoft v. Baker]
- Are malicious prosecution claims cognizable under the 4th Amendment? [Damon Root, Reason on Manuel v. City of Joliet; more, Glenn Harlan Reynolds/Cato Supreme Court Review]
- “Justice Kennedy: The Once and Future Swing Vote” [Ilya Shapiro] Justice Sam Alito’s speech to Federalist Society lawyers looks to post-Scalia era [Adam Liptak, NYT]
- “Supreme Court Justices Push Back On Government’s Expansive Insider-Trading Theories” [Daniel Fisher, earlier on Salman v. U.S., Thaya Brook Knight and related video]
November 23 roundup
- Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales speaks at Cato about standing up to Chinese censors, Friedrich Hayek’s influence on the encyclopedia’s design, and legislative ignorance [video via David Boaz post, related]
- Unlikelihood of confusion: NJ’s Garden State Parkway sends cease and desist over winery logo [Timothy Geigner, TechDirt]
- Occupational licensing rules make it hard to move from state to state [Eric Boehm, related Ilya Somin/USA Today and podcast]
- Lawyers who sued Volkswagen over emissions want $175 million [Joe Mullin]
- “Top ten dodgy lawyers in literature” [Alex Wade, Guardian]
- Useful maxim: “Never support any government power you would not want your ideological enemy wielding” [Coyote]
Media law roundup
- In latest of string of courtroom losses for media, Raleigh News & Observer hit with nearly $6 million libel verdict [Corey Hutchins, CJR] Profile of Charles Harder, newly prominent attorney in suits against media [Hollywood Reporter]
- Following coverage of taco trademark dispute, lawyer demands takedown of image on news story [TechDirt] “California Supreme Court will decide: Can court order Yelp to take down defendant’s post, though Yelp wasn’t even a party to the lawsuit?” [Volokh]
- Theodore Boutrous: “I will represent pro bono anyone Trump sues for exercising their free speech rights. Many other lawyers have offered to join me.” [Ronald K.L. Collins, related chronology of Trump’s record of legal conflict with press]
- Familiar old war on porn re-outfits itself as new war on trafficking [Collins, Elizabeth Nolan Brown on so-called Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act (JVTA)]
- Another where-are-they-now on copyright troll Prenda Law [Joe Mullin/ArsTechnica, see also on Hansmeier]
- “The ‘freedom of the press’ doesn’t give the media any special privileges — but it’s also not a redundancy” [Eugene Volokh]
U.K.: “Iceland (the country) may sue Iceland (the chain) over name”
“The Icelandic government has confirmed it is considering launching a lawsuit against British supermarket Iceland over its name.” The British retailer, which specializes in frozen foods, has been doing business for 46 years. [The Guardian]
Intellectual property roundup
- “Copyright Trolls Now Threatening College Students With Loss of Scholarship, Deportation” [Timothy Geigner, TechDirt]
- Use the phrase “Law Firm 2.0”? Better cease and desist [Carolyn Elefant, MyShingle]
- “How A Supreme Court Case On Cheerleader Costumes and Copyright Could Impact Prosthetic Hands” [Mike Masnick, TechDirt]
- Have you violated your competitor’s legal rights when you buy search engine advertising with its name as keyword? [Eric Goldman on Edible Arrangements case]
- Trader Joe’s keeps battling the Canadian knockoff/reseller Pirate or Irate Joe’s [Lowering the Bar]
- “Unified Patents files legal challenges against top three patent trolls of 2016” [Joe Mullin, ArsTechnica]
Cato panel on the Games That Must Not Be Named
On Wednesday I took part in a panel discussion on the intellectual property issues associated with media commentary on the Olympics, which enjoy a distinctively favorable IP regime: a 1978 federal law gives the U.S. Olympic Committee stronger rights over the word “Olympics” than it would get under ordinary trademark law, including wider scope to go after parody and other situations that will sometimes arguably be fair use. Other panelists include Cato’s Julian Sanchez and Jim Harper, and the moderator was Cato’s Kat Murti. The audience Q&A included a question from noted media law attorney Paul Alan Levy. You can watch here:
Teens develop videogames, receive nastygram over their name
A game named after the Irish prehistoric site Newgrange drew a letter from a lawyer representing a rights owner to the mark “Grange.” [Seth Barrett Tillman, New Reform Club]
August 17 roundup
- Upcoming evening panel on the Olympics and aggressive trademark/copyright policing, with Jim Harper, Julian Sanchez, and me, Kat Murti moderating [at Cato, August 24]
- “We are drowning in law.” New reform project from Philip K. Howard’s Common Good [Take-Charge.org]
- “Extremely Rare Deadly Balloon Tragedy Leads to Familiar Calls for More Regulation” [Scott Shackford, Reason]
- FTC, reversing its administrative law judge, asserts widened authority over data security practices in LabMD case [James Cooper, earlier here, etc.]
- Baltimore police matters, gerrymandering, historic preservation and more in my latest Maryland roundup at Free State Notes;
- “Shark-Attack Lawsuit Raises Interesting Questions, Like What Were You Doing in the Ocean to Begin With” [Lowering the Bar]