|
Highlights
TRADE MARKS – SURVEYS
Assertions Are Not Enough – Survey Evidence in
Trade-mark Cases
Arthur B. Renaud
Trade-mark disputes have recently
received high-profile attention. No fewer than three significant trade-mark
cases have been decided by the Supreme Court of Canada within the last year. In
two cases (Mattel and Lego), sample
survey evidence of consumer perception to the allegedly confusing trade mark was
tendered in an attempt by the senior user to prove that consumers were likely to
confuse the junior user's trade mark with the better known, if not famous, trade
mark of the senior users. In the third case (Veuve Clicquot), no survey
evidence was submitted. In each of the above cases, the senior user lost. Arthur
Renaud analyzes the treatment of survey evidence in trade-mark
cases.
KEYWORD ADVERTISING
Key Legal Issues for Keyword Advertising
Sheldon Burshtein
The multi-billion dollar business of
keyword advertising, or keying, presents unresolved issues relating to potential
liability for search engines that engage in, and advertisers who contract with
search engines for, keyword advertising. Sheldon Burshtein describes the
operation of search engines, the mechanism of keying and how courts in different
jurisdictions have dealt with trade-mark and copyright issues that arise in
keying.
COPYRIGHT – GREY MARKETING
Policing the Grey Market Through Copyright: a Look at Euro
Excellence Inc. v. Kraft Canada Inc.
Adam S. Goodman
In the summer of 2006, the Supreme
Court of Canada granted leave to appeal from a decision of the Federal Court of
Appeal in a significant intellectual property dispute involving the use of
copyright to restrain the phenomenon of grey marketing in Canada. Adam Goodman
examines the phenomenon of and legal responses to grey marketing, the
significance of Euro Excellence Inc. v. Kraft Canada Inc. and its place
within the context of recent Supreme Court jurisprudence regarding the limits of
intellectual property rights.
PATENTS – INJUNCTIONS
United States Supreme Court Helps Fight Against "Patent
Trolls"
Angela Furlanetto, Jennifer Ko
In the recent decision in eBay
Inc. v. MercExchange L.L.C., the United States Supreme Court set aside a
long-established presumption that a permanent injunction will automatically
issue when a patentee is successful in a patent infringement case. Angela
Furlanetto and Jennifer Ko review the decision and explain how the U.S. Supreme
Court has arguably laid a foundation for refusing to grant an injunction to
so-called "patent trolls".
| |
Board
Ronald E. Dimock
Editor-in-Chief
Dimock Stratton Clarizio LLP
David A. Aylen
Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP
Sheldon Burshtein
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Brian W. Gray
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Carol Hitchman
Hitchman & Sprigings
Charles Kent
Ridout & Maybee LLP
Robert J. Lesperance
Lesperance Mendes Mancuso
Arthur B. Renaud
Bennett Jones LLP
Hugues G. Richard
Léger Robic Richard
Cynthia Rowden
Bereskin & Parr
Andrea Rush
Heenan Blaikie LLP |