Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers:


 

logo
347-787-6824

Blog

blog

Blog rss feed

In addition to your RSS feed subscription, you can also sign up for the Firm’s Blog & Press Release post notification by entering your e-mail address and clicking “Subscribe” below.

 


Welcome to the LAW FIRM OF DAYREL SEWELL, PLLC. Thank you for visiting the Blog section of this firm. We will be updating this page with information about the firm, recent legal updates, and other legal issues.

TransUnion Case Law in Privacy-related Cases: Comment on the Article “Statutory Violations Not Enough to Give Rise to a Cause of Action for Class Actions says U.S. Supreme Court”

  In the recent article "Statutory Violations Not Enough to Give Rise to a Cause of Action for Class Actions says U.S. Supreme Court", we have analyzed the high-profile case TransUnion v. Ramirez and, specifically, the Supreme Court's reasoning on the standard of proving tort damages in class actions.  The full article with a detailed analysis of the case is available via the l Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged Article III standing, class action, concrete harm, privacy, statutory violation, TransUnion, U.S. Supreme Court, | 3 Comment

Piece of Cake: What’s Behind Supreme Court Opinions?

Piece of Cake: What’s Behind Supreme Court Opinions? On June 4, 2018 the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in the controversial case, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The case concerned a baker, Mr. Jack Phillips, a devout Christian, who in 2012 declined to create a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding on the basis that doing so would require him to express himself artistically in a way that was inconsistent with his religious beliefs. At the time, gay marriage was not legally recognized in Colorado. However, the state had an anti-discrimination act regarding goods and services available to the public. See C.R.S. 24-34-601. The Commission determined that Mr. Phillips violated the anti-discrimination act. On review, the Supreme Court held Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged Anti-Discrimination, Concurrence, Dissent, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Opinions, Same-Sex Marriage, Supreme Court, | 0 Comment

Statutory Violations Not Enough to Give Rise to a Cause of Action for Class Actions says U.S. Supreme Court

 The Supreme Court’s recent decision in TransUnion v. Ramirez has narrowed Article III standing by making it more difficult for plaintiffs to initiate class action lawsuits against corporate defendants who violate federal statutes.  Here, the Court found that violation of a federal statute alone does not give rise to the level of a “concrete injury” for a plaintiff’s Article III standing.  The plaintiff must have suffered a “concrete injury” to have Article III standing in order to seek relief in a court of Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged Article III standing, class actions, class members, concrete harm, corporate defendants, credit reporting, jurisdiction shopping, OFAC Name Screen Alert, TransUnion, | 0 Comment

PepsiCo: Serial Trademark Infringer or Coincidence?

On June 15, 2021, a food startup named Rise Brewing filed suit against PepsiCo in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The startup has begun to make a name for itself by selling canned cold-brew coffee. Rise Brewing has alleged that the well-known company PepsiCo has infringed on their trademark with their recent launch of a Mountain Dew-branded energy drink called Rise.1 History of InfringementAccording to Forbes, the notorious food, snack, and soda company, PepsiCo, is valued at an astounding $18.2 billion.2 PepsiCo has had its fair share of trademark infringement cases in the past, where they have been sued by brands such as VitaminWater, Pol Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged brand marking, coffee, energy drink, infringement, intellectual property, IP, lawsuit, PepsiCo, protection, restraining order, reverse confusion, Rise Brewing, settlement, soda, trademark, | 4 Comment

eSports Contracts

The electronic sports industry (“eSports”) has skyrocketed since the early 2000s thanks in part to gaming dominant streaming services like Twitch. It is estimated that the number of US digital gamers will jump by around five percent in 2020 to 174.7 million. 1It is also estimated that eSports will garner an audience of 495 million viewers in 2020 and reach over $1 billion in revenue for the first time ever. 2This unprecedented increase in popularity has given rise to professional gamers, gaming personalities, and content creators (“professional gamers”). With professional gamers being paid from as low as $1,000 a month to as high as $6 million a year, one has to examine how eSports contracts are managed. 3 Read More

Posted in Blog | 1 Comment

Copyrighting Tattoos in Sports Video Games: Can LeBron James License His Image?

Tattoos are permanent, often complex, creative, and original pieces of work created by a tattoo artist. Recently, litigation has come up regarding tattoos on famous athletes. While most issues involving tattoos on athletes are more easily handled — such as J.R. Smith’s tattoo of the brand Supreme on his leg1 — there are questions of whether a tattoo is subject to copyright protection when it is prominently displayed and reproduced on a famous athlete in a video game. This question is at the center of a lawsuit filed by Solid Oak Sketches against Take Two Interactive Software as well as two other producers of the popular NBA 2K Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged athletes, copyright, fair use, intellectual property, LeBron James, Mike Tyson, tattoo, | 5 Comment

Trademark Parodies – Flawed or Fair use?

The reworked “fair use” defense has provoked debate because it provides excessively broad immunity to certain types of parodies and other expressive uses of trademarks.1 This Article will explore whether the Trademark Dilution Revision Act (TDRA) promotes a flawed treatment of parodies with regard to sub-clauses that provide selective shelter, and exonerating some parodies from liability while impugning others.2 The principal flaw that is discussed in this Article relates to the parody provision and its application of the trademark use test for determining whether a parody is fair. The provision is pliable in that it can be both lenient and strict on parodies.   Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged Barbie, fair use, intellectual property, Louis Vuitton, parody, TDRA, trademark, Trademark Dilution Revision Act, United States Patent and Trademark Office, | 3 Comment

Trademark Law Implications of AM General v. Activision

Video games have grown in realism since the days of pong on an Atari console.  As technology allows for higher resolutions and graphics, so does the need for attention to detail.  In certain cases, video game developers try to depict the real world.  There are legal implications when this real-world depiction goal includes trademark protected items, such as Humvees.     The federal Lanham Act governs trademarks at the federal level.  There are two basic requirements: (1) that a mark Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged art, federal district court, Humvee, Lanham Act, technology, trademark, video games, | 3 Comment

Prince’s purple: without rain or color trademark protection

In October 2018, Paisley Park Enterprises filed an application with the USPTO (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) for the registration of a color mark for music, live performance, and museum-related uses [1]. Paisley Park Enterprises is known for being decedent Prince Rogers Nelson's company. In August 2017, the Prince Estate and Pantone created a purple color called "Love Symbol #2" to represent Prince [2]. The Pantone Matching system is useful to define particular shades of color, and to ensure a consistent use of the same color for one company [3].   [caption id="attachment_895" align="aligncenter" width="434"] Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged color mark, Louboutin, Prince, purple, Purple Rain, Saint Laurent, secondary meaning, Supreme Court, Tiffany, trademark, UPS, USPTO, | 4 Comment

Recent Developments in Governmental Takings

Takings by the government have long been a murky area.  The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not proffer a great deal of insight into how takings were to be effected.  Recent case law adds some clarity to the murky sediment, but it remains a complex topic.  The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment exists to recompense private citizens in the event that government effects a taking of private property.  It states, “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”  The intent behind this was to limit government in its task of maintaining public interest rather than empower it, but it also serves also to give the private citizen recourse when government (local, State or Federal) takes physical possession of land for public use.  Over th Read More

Posted in Blog | Tagged fifth amendment, New York, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, takings, U.S. constitution, wetlands, | 4 Comment