About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2021 - April 2022)

handle is hein.ali/retuc0513 and id is 1 raw text is: UNFAIR COMPETITION 3D Generally D.Ariz.2021. Cit. generally in case cit. in disc. Female models, business women, and social-media personalities sued operator of a strip club, alleging, inter alia, that defendant violated plaintiffs' right to publicity by using photographs of their likeness to advertise the strip club without plaintiffs' consent. After removal, this court denied in part defendant's motion for summary judgment, holding that state statutes protecting the right of publicity for soldiers did not preclude plaintiffs' common-law right-of- publicity claims. The court observed that state caselaw recognized the right of publicity set forth by the Restatement Third of Unfair Competition as a cause of action, because Arizona courts applied the Restatement so long as there was no law to the contrary. Longoria v. Kodiak Concepts LLC, 527 F.Supp.3d 1085, 1097. CHAPTER 1. THE FREEDOM TO COMPETE § 1. General Principles E.D.Pa.2021. Cit. in cases cit. in sup. Former employer brought, among other things, an unfair- competition claim against former employee and competitor, alleging that defendants misappropriated plaintiff's confidential information by obtaining unauthorized access to plaintiff's proprietary information and causing plaintiff pecuniary harm. This court denied defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiff satisfactorily alleged a common-law claim for unfair competition. The court relied on Restatement Third of Unfair Competition § 1 in defining the elements of an unfair-competition claim, and explained that a cause of action for unfair competition was recognized where there was evidence of unlawful use of confidential information and tortious interference with contracts. M3 USA Corporation v. Hart, 516 F.Supp.3d 476, 504. CHAPTER 3. THE LAW OF TRADEMARKS TOPIC 1. SUBJECT MATTER OF TRADEMARK LAW § 9. Definitions of Trademark and Service Mark C.A.10, 2021. Com. (f) quot. in ftn. Putative owner of service marks, who created a virtual-assistant program and an associated internet search engine, sued bank, alleging that defendant violated the Lanham Act and infringed upon plaintiff's service marks used for his virtual assistant and the domain name for the search engine by creating an almost identically-named virtual assistant used on a mobile banking application. The district court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment. This court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded, holding that there was a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether plaintiff engaged in actual use of his mark for the virtual assistant, but he did not have a COPYRIGHT ©2022 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved AILJ Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most