Liquid Glass Enterprises, Inc. v. Dr. Ing. H.C.F. Porsche AG

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that Liquid Glass’ fair use defense was defeated, in part, because Porsche would “likely prevail in demonstrating that the use of Porsche’s trademarks ... in Liquid Glass’s advertisements would likely confuse consumers as to Porsche’s connection with Liquid Glass”
• finding that Liquid Glass’ fair use defense was defeated, in part, because Porsche would “likely prevail in demonstrating that the use of Porsche’s trademarks ... in Liquid Glass’s advertisements would likely confuse consumers as to Porsche’s connection with Liquid Glass”
• finding that Liquid Glass’ fair use defense was defeated, in part, because Porsche would “likely prevail in demonstrating that the use of Porsche’s trademarks ... in Liquid Glass’s advertisements would likely confuse consumers as to Porsche’s connection with Liquid Glass”
• unauthorized use of trademark and trade dress likely to slowly whittle away the distinctiveness of Porsche’s- marks

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).