The Supreme Court is set to hear oral argument in VIP Prods. LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc., a case that asks whether that VIP’s “Bad Spaniels” dog toy whimsically mimicking the appearance of a Jack Daniels whisky bottle is protected expression under the First Amendment. The case follows a long and uncertain line of parody products cases, and, by tying the defense of such cases to the First Amendment, has the potential to undo almost entirely the rights of brand owners to limit such mischievous marketing practices.
Jonathan Moskin and Ashley Koley of Foley & Lardner trace key points in the history of the law of fair use from its origins in the Supreme Court 100 years ago to its present somewhat muddied state, and turn to the horizon to offer insights into where the Supreme Court might bring some clarity going forward.
“Everyone tells me I’m doing a great job. My clients, my colleagues, my family. Why do I...
You have accepted representation in a defensive asylum case before the immigration court – now...
Cellphones represent one of the fastest-changing areas of legal practice. Mobile device evidence is ...
Few parts of the discovery process are more intimidating than deposing an expert witness. Profession...
When lawyers represent clients in litigation, those lawyers assume the role of advocate. Of course, ...
A central purpose of ERISA is to enable uniform plan administration of employee benefit plans withou...
Join Sheila Millar, leader of Keller and Heckman LLP’s consumer protection regulatory practice...
In this program we will discuss all facets of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP) including: reim...
In recent years, the enforcement of commercial and investment arbitration awards against sovereigns ...
You have accepted representation in a defensive asylum case before the immigration court – now...