Hasbro, Inc. v. Clue Computing, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “minor and isolated” discrepancies “need 3 not be fatal to credibility”
• noting very little similarity between Hasbro’s board game CLUE and the products and services of Clue Computing
• computer consulting firm did not infringe on board game maker’s mark “Clue” because goods and services offered by the parties were wholly distinct
• in affirming summary judg ment in favor of trademark defendant, endorsing District Court’s “refusal to enter the ‘initial interest confusion’ thicket . . . given the unlikelihood of ‘legally significant’ confusion” in a case “involving such disparate products and services”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).