(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought under the Lanham Act by a producer of karaoke music tracks, alleging that the defendants performed karaoke shows using unauthorized 'media-shifted' files that had been copied onto computer hard drives from the compact discs released by the plaintiff, the district court's dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff did not state a claim under the Lanham Act because there was no likelihood of consumer confusion about the origin of a good properly cognizable in a claim of trademark infringement.

(Supreme Court of California) - Reversing the judgment of the Court of Appeal insofar as it determined that a 2011 analysis of greenhouse gas emission impacts prepared as part of a project for the development of transportation infrastructure in San Diego was inadequate and required revision.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the district court's rejection of First Amendment violation claims brought by an exotic dancing venue complaining that a city regulates sexually oriented businesses differently than it does mainstream performances such as ballets and concerts, that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by barring 18 to 21 year olds from owning sexually oriented businesses, but finding that the district court erred in rejecting a claim that the denial provisions of the licensing regulation are an unconstitutional prior restraint, striking this provision from the Ordinance and remanding to consider its severability.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reinstated claims for violation of California law copyrights possessed in certain musical performance sound recordings. The plaintiff copyright holders argued that their decision to remaster their pre-1972 analog sound recordings onto digital formats did not bring the remastered sound recordings exclusively under the ambit of federal law. Agreeing with the plaintiffs that their state law copyright claims were not preempted, the Ninth Circuit reversed the entry of summary judgment for the defendant radio broadcasters.

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that a fan of the singer Michael Jackson could not proceed with her proposed class action lawsuit against an entertainment company and others for releasing a posthumous album that allegedly contained three fake tracks not actually sung by the popular singer. The defendants, who filed an anti-SLAPP motion, contended that the claims against them must be stricken. Agreeing with them, the California Second Appellate District reversed the trial court's denial of the anti-SLAPP motion in relevant part.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reinstated a lawsuit alleging that a movie studio breached its collective-bargaining agreement with musicians who score motion pictures. The musicians' labor union contended that the movie studio breached the labor agreement by having the film Same Kind of Different As Me scored in Slovakia, rather than hiring union musicians in the U.S. and Canada. Finding genuine disputes of material fact, the Ninth Circuit reversed the entry of summary judgment for the movie studio and remanded for further proceedings.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In an amended opinion, reinstated musical recording owners' claims that radio broadcasters violated their state law copyrights in pre-1972 analog sound recordings that were later remastered onto digital formats. Reversed the entry of summary judgment for the broadcasters and also reversed the striking of the plaintiffs' class certification motion.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that an African American-owned operator of television networks sufficiently pleaded a claim that a cable television operator refused to enter into a carriage contract based on racial bias, in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 1981. Also, the section 1981 claim was not barred by the First Amendment. On interlocutory appeal, affirmed denial of a motion to dismiss.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed order denying Defendant’s motion to strike. Plaintiff represented deceased celebrity, Jenni Rivera, and they sought to restrict disclosure by Defendant broadcaster of certain information. Appeals court ruled the First Amendment protected broadcaster’s use of information and reversed trial court order.

(United States Second Circuit) - In a trademark suit brought by a provider of healthcare services against a provider of digital health-related content, the District Court's injunction which prohibited defendant from using its marks within plaintiff’s geographic service area, but placed no restriction on defendant's use of its marks on the Internet or outside plaintiff's service area, is affirmed but remanded for expansion of the injunction's scope, where the current limitations placed on defendant were based on an incorrect standard and fail to give plaintiff and the public adequate protection from likely confusion.

(United States Second Circuit) - In a trademark infringement dispute between software companies over several trademarks containing the word 'collective,' the District Court's granted summary judgment to Cross Commerce Media on virtually all points in dispute and awarded attorney's fees under the Lanham Act are reversed in part where: 1) the unregistered mark 'collective' is suggestive, not descriptive; 2) there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether CI used the unregistered mark 'collective' in commerce before CCM introduced its allegedly infringing marks; 3) the district court prematurely granted summary judgment as to CI's counterclaim for infringement of the registered marks, an action that neither party requested and the district court did not explain; and 4) there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether CI abandoned its registered marks 'Collective Network' and 'Collective Video.' Award of attorney fees is vacated.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought under the Lanham Act by a producer of karaoke music tracks, alleging that the defendants performed karaoke shows using unauthorized 'media-shifted' files that had been copied onto computer hard drives from the compact discs released by the plaintiff, the district court's dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff did not state a claim under the Lanham Act because there was no likelihood of consumer confusion about the origin of a good properly cognizable in a claim of trademark infringement.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirming the district court's determination that New York law allows for derivative litigation rights in a suit on Lanham Act claims and a motion for preliminary injunction under the first-filed rule, but vacating the dismissal of the complaint and injunction motion in favor of a first-filed Georgia action because the Georgia suit was transferred to New York, so the reasoning behind the first-filed ruling no longer pertains, and affirming the district court's award of costs, including attorney fees incurred in the Georgia state action.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversing the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a suit for trademark infringement relating to foam earplugs in a specific bright green color used by the plaintiffs in their earplugs because the district court's conclusion that the green color mark was functional and therefore not protectable as trade dress was in error. The existence or nonexistence of alternative designs is probative of functionality or nonfunctionality and a genuine issue of fact regarding whether the color was functional remained.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Judgment affirmed in favor of plaintiff regarding a trademark infringement matter. The court held that because of the delay of the defendant in challenging plaintiff's trademark, the doctrine of laches could be used as a defense. Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to apply the doctrine of unclean hands or the inevitable confusion doctrine against plaintiff.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Remanded for recalculation of an attorney fee award in a trademark infringement action, in which one nonprofit organization accused another of stealing its logo. Both organizations endorse political candidates.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In a contractual dispute over ownership of a trademark in a restaurant name, affirmed a bench trial decision in part and reversed it in part.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified when federal law will preempt a state law claim that a drug manufacturer failed to warn consumers of a drug's risks. Held that this preemption question is one for a judge to decide, not a jury. Also spelled out the "clear evidence" standard that applies in this context. Justice Breyer, joined by five justices, delivered the U.S. Supreme Court's majority opinion in this product liability lawsuit against a drugmaker.

(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of civil procedure, held that a third-party counterclaim defendant -- that is, a party brought into a lawsuit through a counterclaim filed by the original defendant -- may not remove a class-action counterclaim from state court to federal court. Justice Thomas, joined by the four liberal justices, delivered the opinion of a 5-4 Court in this debt collection lawsuit.

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed what law applies on the Outer Continental Shelf, holding that California wage-and-hour law was inapplicable to a worker on an offshore drilling platform. Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, if federal law addresses the relevant issue, state law is not adopted as surrogate federal law. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a Maryland public monument in the shape of a 32-foot tall Latin cross did not violate the Establishment Clause. A humanist group and others argued that the memorial to soldiers who died in World War I must be removed because of the crucifix shape. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed. Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court; however, only certain portions of his opinion received support from a majority of the justices.

(United States Supreme Court) - Reversed and remanded. Defendants sought disclosure, through a FOIA request, of names and addresses of retail stores who participated in the national food stamp program. Plaintiff refused to provide that information stating that substantive competitive harm would be caused. The district court disagreed with plaintiff and ordered disclosure. The US Supreme Court reversed and held that data provided under an assurance of privacy was an exemption to a FOIA request.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the government's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire did not violate the Enumeration Clause or the Census Act. However, the sole stated reason for reinstating the question "seems to have been contrived," and therefore it was appropriate to remand the case back to the agency on that ground. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the Court's opinion, some portions of which were unanimous while others received the support of only four justices in various groupings.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed to allow withdrawal of guilty pleas. A new law was passed, Pen. Code Sec. 1473.7, that allowed a conviction to be vacated when there was no meaningful understanding of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea. The court held that there did not have to be proof of actual ineffective assistance of counsel, but merely a preponderance of the evidence.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Vacated and complaint dismissed. Plaintiff sought declaratory judgment against Defendant, Homeland Security, claiming that DHS improperly denied application for legal permanent resident. Appellate court held that Plaintiff failed to state a legally cognizable claim.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition for review of Board of Immigration decision denied, where Defendant could not show legal or constitutional reasons to provide court the jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of sua sponte reopening.

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

r/Coronavirus: In December 2019, a novel coronavirus strain (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in the city of Wuhan, China. This subreddit seeks to monitor the …

RT @antimega: At @GDSTeam we’re running a number of online events for Global Accessibility Awareness Day on 21 May - please join us! #accessibility #AccessibilityRegulations

Men's & women's Mod clothing at Madcap England. Huge range of boating blazers, flares, racing jumpers, polos and dresses. Free UK delivery orders over £75.

In an age of trolls, economic insecurity and social isolation, mixed martial arts gives fans a rush of harsh reality.

This note examines the published data protection impact assessment (DPIA) released by NHSX in relation to their contact tracing/proximity tracing app. It highlights a range of significant issues which leave the app falling short of data protection legislation. It does this in order so that these issues can be remedied before the next DPIA is published.

Behind every Trump attack is self-revelation. Every counterpunch is a self-punch. @gtconway3d: “Because he fears being revealed as a fake or deranged, he’ll call others fake or deranged. Because he fears losing, he’ll call them losers instead.”

DAY 1 に申し込んでみた✋

Opinion | How to Punish Voters via Instapaper https://ift.tt/2yFNRbK

There's been a meme going round that women leaders have dealt better with coronavirus. I don't think that's right: women aren't better, it's just that strongmen are worse.

via Health News - The New York Times https://nyti.ms/2WLL65m

Google Lens now lets you copy/paste text from handwritten notes to your laptop!

The complaint that Washington is out of step with Main Street has been circulating for roughly as long as each metonym has been in use. But it’s seldom, if ever, been more true than at this moment in the coronavirus pandemic.