IP Law 101 for the Sports Fan. AmLaw Daily has this article about a recently filed trademark/copyright infringement case involving baseball trading cards.

Around the Center. The latest from the Berkman Center: John Palfrey has a post titled "ONI Releases Green Dam Software Analysis." JZ has this take on the use of Twitter to disseminate news about the goings-on in Iran.

More on the Salinger Case. THR, Esq. has the latest.

Seems Like Bad Precedent. Where's the deterrence factor for prosecutorial misconduct if the judge can just shoehorn the evidence in later at the sentencing phase? The Blog of the Legal Times reports.

Big Day for Music Cases. The Insider reports that the Lemonhead's lead singer, Evan Dando, has sued GM over use of "It's a Shame About Ray" in a 2008 TV campaign. And just last week a federal judge had a bit of fun with Bon Jovi song titles. (I'm having to exercise all sorts of self restraint to avoid a YouTube linkfest...)

Does Austrailian Copyright Law Not Have a Statute of Limitations Provision? Certainly they should have figured out the supposed similarity earlier.
Check it out for yourself:

I Always Knew Cap'n Crunch Was Shady. ABA Journal is reporting that a judge has tossed out a deceptive advertising complaint against Cap'n Crunch cereal.

I'm Feeling Special. First we get a First Lady, now we get a Supreme Court Justice.

The Wind Done Gone 2.0? The Media Law Prof Blog reports on a recent case filed by J.D. Salinger to halt publication of a "sequel" to Catcher in the Rye. Remix culture? Mark Randazza offers his own thoughts. And the Wall Street Journal has more here.

More Grist for the Anti-tethered Appliance Mill? Apple once again provides ammunition for JZ's fears.

That's One Way to Find a Job... Read all about how one guy from Italy got hired by Amazon through Second Life.

Time to Add "Rap Artist" to the List... of alternate career paths for lawyers. The ABA Journal has the details.

Yawn. Did anyone expect the MPAA's position to be different?

Courts About to Reign In Privacy Services? The Legal Satyricon has this report on a recent decision out of California finding that a privacy service may be held contributorily liable under the ACPA for its customer's actions. Things could get interesting...

Somebody's Been Watching Pump Up the Volume Again. Wired has this report about the (claimed) scope of the FCC's inspection authority. The claims at the beginning seem over hyped, especially since Wired doesn't cite any case where the FCC based their right to enter on the presence of a cell phone or other household device that transmits a radio frequency.

It's Been a While... Since I've seen Lessig this loquacious.

Maybe I'm Just Facebook Illiterate... but how would one even accomplish this from a technological standpoint? Create a page called "You've Been Sued" and send a request for him to join? And what happens if he's set his privacy settings to only appear in searches by his friends?

WalMart + Apple = ? On the one hand, I could see this increasing Apple's market share. But would it be at the cost of the "cool factor," which Apple has spent millions of advertising dollars to create?

Danger Mouse Pushing the Envelope Again. EFF has this report on Danger Mouse's upcoming "release." And where have I been that I didn't know Danger Mouse helped form Gnarls Barkley?

Increasing Pressures on Patent Regime. Intellectual Property Watch has this report on efforts at the UN to balance intellectual property rights with human rights. This comes a few days after the ACLU filed suit challenging patents granted over certain breast cancer genes on First Amendment grounds.

The Redskins-Cowboys Rivalry Can Live On. How Appealing has the latest (last?) on the challenge to the Redskins' trademarks filed by some Native American groups.

Google Waiving the Red Flag. CNet reports that Google has revised its AdWords policy to begin allowing some trademarks to appear in some AdWords copy. This comes on the heels of recent trademark infringement cases filed against the search company, including a class action recently filed in Texas on behalf of trademark owners.

Maybe One Day I'll Be Able to Afford Solar Power. Between this product and Veranda Solar's expandable panels, affordable, city-friendly solar power seems to be closer to a reality.

The Revenge of Eldred? Court strikes down law restoring foreign copyrights.

Kabuki Theater in Washington. Wendy has a wrap-up of this week's DMCA hearings.

We're All Criminals Now? Wired is reporting on a recent case upholding an Ohio man's felony hacking conviction as a result of his use of a work computer in violation of his employer's Internet policy. While we can all agree that use of a work computer to upload porn deserves some sort of censure, do we really want to go down a path that makes violations of private Internet terms of use into criminal conduct? Given the draconian nature of many employers' terms of use (the terms of which employers and employees often appear to have a tactic agreement to ignore), you could be risking more than just your job by booking that plane ticket to Boise to see your parents using your work computer.

Is this Really Unique to Twitter? Shouldn't the headline read "Potential Confidentiality Perils of Employees with Big Mouths"?

Oops. Ars Technica has an interesting report on the recent leak of the archive of a mailing list used by the American Psychological Association and the Pentagon to disucuss the profession's role in torture interrogations.

More from the "Nothing on the Internet is Private" Files. Wired has a report on a recent case out of New Jersey that finds two individuals suing their former-employer for invasion of privacy based on the employer gaining access to a private MySpace group (resulting in the "former" part of "former-employer"). Interesting discussions around the CMLP offices about whether or not the element of coercion takes this out of the typical employment-at-will framework.

All Your Facebooks Are Belong to Us? CNet is reporting on a new tool to allow hackers to control large numbers of Facebook accounts using cookie data.

Is Anyone Actually Surprised by Scalia's Reaction? He's never struck me as a subscriber to the "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" philosophy. The Chronicle reports on a Fordham professor's recent Internet privacy experiment.

Feeling Old. JZ weighs in on Cato's debate celebrating the 10-year anniversary of Lessig's Code.

But Where Will I Go to Find Erotic Massages? Sam has a new post up at the CMLP blog about the recent move by the South Carolina AG to crack down on Craigslist.

Just What I (Don't) Need... An application that encourages shopping. At least it looks like it will save you money. Tech Crunch has the details.

More Headaches for Trademark Owners. Eric Goldman reports that Google will begin selling trademarks as keywords in 190 additional countries.

Like Squeezing Blood from a Stone? PoynterOnline points to a discussion about a new project spearheaded by Murdoch to come up with a workable model to charge for online content. What type of features would such a system need to have to be commercially successful?

Get Your Copyright On. The Economist is hosting a week-long debate about copyright law. HLS/Berkman's own Terry Fisher is participating. Via Michael Geist.

Today's Funny. From Non Sequitur.

Much Ado About a Dot. I couldn't possibly let this one go without a post. Reuters is reporting that uber-trendy Sprinkles Cupcakes (which bills itself as "The Original Cupcake Bakery") has sued the rapidly-expanding Famous Cupcakes for trademark infringement. Sprinkles alleges that Famous Cupcakes has infringed its federally registered trademark for a circle within a circle placed at the center of a cupcake. Without commenting on the merits of Sprinkle's claims (since I haven't seen the complaint), I will make the observation that the "modern dot" design appears to be quite the fad in graphic design right now, appearing on bedding, stationary, swim meet logos, and numerous other items I'm too lazy to look up. (I'm pretty sure that one of the current in-store displays at Caribou Coffee uses something similar to the "modern dot.") As for the cupcake battles, Famous Cupcakes gets extra points for shipping their cupcakes nationwide, although I must give props to Sprinkles for announcing plans to come to DC. (And if you want to know just how out-of-hand the cupcake craze has become, do a search of TEAS for marks registered and applied-for in connection with cupcakes and bakery services...) Now I really want a cupcake.

I Bet NutraSweet is Wishing it had Splenda's Lawyers. The WSJ Law Blog is reporting on a recent decision issued by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in a trade dress infringement suit brought by the makers of Splenda against a generic artificial sweetener manufacturer. From the opinion:

[W]hile it is true that the packaging of other sweetener products often contain depictions of coffee, iced tea, baked goods, fruit, and/or cereal, these depictions do not diminish the inherent distinctiveness of the Splenda trade dress when we consider the trade dress as a whole. . . . [The fact that other sweetener products used a yellow, blue and white color scheme prior to the introduction of Splenda] does not detract from Splenda’s inherent distinctiveness.

Life Imitates Ad. Following up on this post, it seems like Coke Zero has gotten itself in a real trademark litigation. According to Law.com,

Last March, Baig's attorneys contacted Coke for the sixth time in a formal demand letter. On June 5, Coke received yet another letter from Baig's counsel stating that Baig was 'dead serious about filing suit' and promising to forward a copy of the complaint he intended to file if Coke did not meet Baig's demands by June 13. That complaint, according to the Coke pleading, never arrived.

I would say that that should be sufficient to support a DJ action.

</Radio Silence> I just had to share this one. According to Reuters, "Robert Burck -- for 10 years a fixture in Times Square, who strums a white guitar while dressed only in white cowboy boots and hat and skimpy white underwear -- filed the suit in February over video billboards depicting a blue M&M dressed in his signature outfit." (How did I miss this until now?) Now here's the interesting part: "Burck, who poses for photos with giggling tourists in return for dollars slipped into his boots, has trademarked his look and licensed his name and likeness to companies for endorsements and advertisements, including a Chevrolet commercial that appeared during a Super Bowl." 1) Yes, Burck has a registration for a design consisting of a man with a guitar in a cowboy hat and boots, but I'm not sure that constiutes "trademark[ing] his look." 2) The services in his registration for NAKED COWBOY seem really broad. Is singing in a video game really the same thing as "entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game"? 3) Isn't NAKED COWBOY a bit misdescriptive? 4) Am I the only one less likely to buy a product endorsed by this guy?

From the IP is Everywhere Files. Phosita points to this patent application comprising a "method and instrument for proposing marriage to an individual." Would have been a lot of wasted effort if Ellie said no...

And finally, here we have a Bearded Iris called "Copyright."

Second Life Gets its Own IPL Committee. The IPL section of the American Bar Association has annouced the creation of a new committee "responsible for monitoring developments in and educating members regarding legal issues that affect computer gaming and virtual worlds." For information on the Special Commitee on Computer Gaming and Virtual Worlds, or to sign up, go here.

Interesting Philosophical Approach. CNN reports in "Author suspicious of similar character on TV." From the article:

"I said, 'Holy jeez, talk about Freudian typos,' " Hamill recalled. "Hey, maybe this will sell the novel: 'You've seen the knockoff, now try the book.' Who knows?"

Let's Hope Apple Had an Indemnity Clause. Salon.com is reporting that "Eminem sues Apple for copyright infringement." From the article: "In this case, Apple received permission from Universal, Eminem's label, to sell his music on iTunes. But Eight Mile Style, his publisher, says that it also has the right to approve such sales. And because Eight Mile Style never allowed Universal to transfer music-downloading rights to Apple, it says that Apple has no right to sell the rapper's music."

A Strange Case Indeed. Law.com reports on a recent Eleventh Circuit copyright decision in "Citing Supreme Court Precedent, 11th Circuit Reverses Major Copyright Ruling." From the article: "By declaring Greenberg I moot, the new panel -- Judge Rosemary Barkett, Senior Judge Phyllis A. Kravitch and David G. Trager, a visiting U.S. district judge from the 2nd Circuit in New York -- also resolved a long-standing conflict with the 2nd Circuit created by the Birch opinion. Trager wrote the Greenberg II opinion for the new panel."

Scripts have covers? The AP reports in "Author says 'Knocked Up' ripped off." From the article: "She claims that while pitching her book to Hollywood producers, she learned of Apatow's project and the script, which she says had on it a picture of a martini glass with a pacifier around the stem -- the same as the cover of her book." Apparently, some people feel strongly enough about this to attempt to find uses of the martini glass and pacifier motif that predate Eckler's. The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog has a post about the suit that goes into more of the claimed differences between Eclker's memoir and the film.

So How Does He Plan on Getting Around the Statute of Limitations? World Entertainment News Network reports that "'N Sync In Plagiarism Controversy." From the article: "Former boy band 'N Sync are being sued over claims they plagiarised a song on their 2001 album Celebrity."

New Copyright Case Regarding Song Remakes. The AP reports that "Beyonce song in licensing dispute." From the article: "In the complaint, which was filed in U.S. District Court in New York, The Royalty Network Inc., argues that even though Beyonce's version of the song has an altered title and additional lyrics, the singer and her record company failed to get a written agreement to release their remake."

Vonage Gets a Reprieve. The Washington Post reports that "Vonage Can Sell Services During Appeal, Court Says." From the article: "Roger Warin, a lawyer for Vonage, told the appeals court during morning arguments that the company faced a 'real risk of insolvency' if barred from selling its service to new customers as the trial court ordered earlier this month. He asked the three-judge panel to extend an emergency reprieve allowing the company to continue adding new customers."

You Decide. Bloomberg reports that "Exxon Mobil Sues Hyundai Over "Mobis' Trademark." From the article: "Exxon Mobil, based in Irving, Texas, asked a federal judge in Wilmington, Delaware, yesterday to bar auto-parts maker Hyundai Mobis Co. from using the 'Mobis' logo and other potentially confusing marks."

And We Have a Circuit Split. 43(B)log reports on the recent Second Circuit decision in "Second Circuit rejects foreign famous marks doctrine federally, certifies state question." From the post: "The Second Circuit, after a long wait, has finally ruled on the validity of the famous marks exception to the territorial scope of trademark protection – and found no such exception in federal law."