12 Cited authorities

Herbert v. Lando
441 U.S. 153 (1979) Cited 1,587 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the relevancy of deposing a defendant publisher in a defamation case about his conduct and mental state could "hardly be doubted" even if the defendant was unlikely to admit to liable conduct in the deposition
Trammel v. United States
445 U.S. 40 (1980) Cited 1,188 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that because "[t]estimonial exclusionary rules and privileges contravene the fundamental principle that 'the public . . . has a right to every man's evidence,' . . . they must be strictly construed"
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
510 U.S. 569 (1994) Cited 629 times 71 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”
N. A. A. C. P. v. Alabama
357 U.S. 449 (1958) Cited 1,954 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[c]ompelled disclosure of membership in an organization engaged in advocacy of particular beliefs" may violate the First Amendment
Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.Com, Inc.
487 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 467 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that an online image search index was "highly transformative"
Perry v. Schwarzenegger
591 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 117 times
Holding that mandamus is appropriate to review a discovery order that raises novel and important questions
In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litigation
707 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (D. Kan. 2010) Cited 106 times
Setting aside order when the magistrate judge “applied an incorrect legal standard or failed to consider an element of the applicable standard”
United We Stand America, Inc. v. United We Stand, America New York, Inc.
128 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 1997) Cited 95 times
Holding that the Lanham Act's reference to "use in commerce" extends to all activities within the scope of the Constitution's commerce clause
In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices
641 F.3d 470 (10th Cir. 2011) Cited 43 times
Holding that "discovery orders adverse to a claimed First Amendment privilege are not immediately appealable under the [collateral order] doctrine because they are effectively reviewable after final judgment and by other means"
National Organization for Marriage v. McKee
723 F. Supp. 2d 236 (D. Me. 2010) Cited 2 times
Civil No. 09-538-B-H. May 23, 2010. James Bopp, Jr., Randy Elf, Jeffrey Gallant, Josiah Neeley, Joseph Vanderhulst, Bopp, Coleson Bostrom, Terre Haute, IN, Stephen C. Whiting, The Whiting Law Firm, Portland, ME, for Plaintiffs. Phyllis Gardiner, Thomas A. Knowlton, Maine Attorney General's Office, Augusta, ME, Benjamin K. Grant, McTeague, Higbee, Case, Cohen, Whitney Toker, P.A., Topsham, ME, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON SECOND SET OF DISCOVERY DISPUTES JOHN H. RICH, III, United
Section 1114 - Remedies; infringement; innocent infringement by printers and publishers
15 U.S.C. § 1114 Cited 7,908 times 88 Legal Analyses
Holding liable "Any person who shall, without the consent of the registrant — use in commerce any reproduction . . . of a registered mark . . . in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion."
Section 101 - Definitions
17 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 6,344 times 174 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886

American Society for Testing and Materials et al v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, Inc.

12 Cited authorities

Holding that the relevancy of deposing a defendant publisher in a defamation case about his conduct and mental state could "hardly be doubted" even if the defendant was unlikely to admit to liable conduct in the deposition

Holding that because "[t]estimonial exclusionary rules and privileges contravene the fundamental principle that 'the public . . . has a right to every man's evidence,' . . . they must be strictly construed"

Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”

Holding that "[c]ompelled disclosure of membership in an organization engaged in advocacy of particular beliefs" may violate the First Amendment

Holding that an online image search index was "highly transformative"

Holding that mandamus is appropriate to review a discovery order that raises novel and important questions

Setting aside order when the magistrate judge “applied an incorrect legal standard or failed to consider an element of the applicable standard”

Holding that the Lanham Act's reference to "use in commerce" extends to all activities within the scope of the Constitution's commerce clause

Holding that "discovery orders adverse to a claimed First Amendment privilege are not immediately appealable under the [collateral order] doctrine because they are effectively reviewable after final judgment and by other means"

Holding liable "Any person who shall, without the consent of the registrant — use in commerce any reproduction . . . of a registered mark . . . in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion."

Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886