The Taubman Company v. Webfeats, a Texas Company and Henry Mishkoff, an Individual

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that website with two links to websites of for-profit entities violated the Lanham Act
• concluding that website with two links to websites of for-profit entities violated the Lanham Act
• stating that the only relevant question is whether there is confusion as to the origin of the respective products
• noting that the misleading commercial speech that the Lanham Act deals with is not entitled to First Amendment protection
• stating that the “Lanham Act is constitutional because it only regulates commercial speech”
• noting “[i]f consumers are confused by an 27 infringing mark, the offender’s motives are largely irrelevant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).