Booble Update
Booble really seems to have thought their free riding out ahead of time. They received a cease and desist dated Jan 20 from Google and responded on Jan 28 telling Google that they don't think that the law support's Google's position and Google should reconsider because "Booble is parody."
Booble's IP Counsel did a good job of covering the trademark cases, including the LL Beane case I mentioned last time, as well as distinguishing the copyright parody case that Google cites. However, both parties fail to mention the Second Circuit case I cited, Deere v. MTD, which states that a seller of commercial products who seeks attention for their product by poking fun runs the risk of diluting the selling power of plaintiff's trademark. That case seems to me to be right on -- I wonder if it is still good case law.
Prior Post: Titillating new search engine may irk Google
Booble Explains Meaning Of Parody To Google Lawyers
Schwimmer: "A parody comments on the entity it is satirizing ... but Booble in general does not do so."
When is parody protected from a charge of trademark infringement?
Booble's IP Counsel did a good job of covering the trademark cases, including the LL Beane case I mentioned last time, as well as distinguishing the copyright parody case that Google cites. However, both parties fail to mention the Second Circuit case I cited, Deere v. MTD, which states that a seller of commercial products who seeks attention for their product by poking fun runs the risk of diluting the selling power of plaintiff's trademark. That case seems to me to be right on -- I wonder if it is still good case law.
Prior Post: Titillating new search engine may irk Google
