Proving Harm In Trademark Cases Post-Herb Reed

Law360
April.16.2014

Members of Orrick’s IP team authored an article on what the abolition of the presumption of irreparable harm means for parties seeking a preliminary injunction in trademark cases.

Authors

Beth Goldman Partner, Trademark, Copyright & Media, Geistiges Eigentum

San Francisco

See my bio

D:+1 415 773 4580
E: [email protected]

Practice:

Technology & Innovation Sector
Trademark, Copyright & Media
Geistiges Eigentum

vCard

See full bio

Beth Goldman Partner

San Francisco

She has been assisting clients in the selection and creation of brands, as well as their protection, for more than 20 years. Her experience includes worldwide prosecution and policing of trademarks, dispute resolution, UDRP proceedings and litigation before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Her clients cover a variety of industries, including alternative energy, biotechnology, clothing, computer services, consumer products, credit card services, food and beverages, medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, software, and telecommunications.

She has spoken on trade dress for the Practising Law Institute on intellectual property, and on domain name and other issues for the International Trademark Association. She has served on various INTA committees.

Daniel Justice Senior Associate, Geistiges Eigentum

San Francisco

See my bio

D:+1 415 773 5821
E: [email protected]

Practice:

Technology & Innovation Sector
Geistiges Eigentum

vCard

See full bio

Daniel Justice Senior Associate

San Francisco

These matters involved issues such as government contractor immunity to patent infringement; the effect of amendments to a patent licensing agreement; the effect of an expired utility patent for a chemical composition on the validity of a related trademark for medical implants; the copyrightability of short phrases and the merger doctrine; the copyrightability and fair use of religious materials; and multiple oppositions to office actions, and petitions to cancel trademark registrations to the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board.

Daniel has also worked on Internet-related matters involving the legal effect of “browsewrap” agreements; violations of Web page terms of use; the circumvention of technological barriers to access Web pages; violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act; copyright issues related to cache copying of Web pages; the use of “spiders” to collect data from Web pages; the legality of “deep-linking” to web pages; and the legality of search engine aggregation and display of copyrighted Web pages.

Daniel has recently co-authored a scholarly article with Warrington S. Parker III entitled, "The Differing Approaches to Preemption Under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act" that was published in Volume 49, Issue 2 of the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal. Daniel is also a contributing author to the NorCal IP Blog, which covers notable new intellectual property case filings and verdicts in the Northern District of California. Links to articles Daniel has authored can be found under the "Publications" section of this bio.

Related Areas

Intellectual Property

Markets

Bay Area: San Francisco and Silicon Valley