by hunter101 » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:03 pm
by mattjgilbert » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:30 pm
by hunter101 » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:51 pm
by BANE » Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:05 pm
by killmaimburn » Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:21 am
hunter101 wrote:Winston & Strawn Defeats Hundreds of Trademark and Copyright Infringement Claims on Behalf of Pro Bono Client.
ruffian4 wrote:Handy fellow, this kmb...Like Ahriman delving the paths of the webway ...
by Baragash » Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:25 pm
by BANE » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:15 pm
by killmaimburn » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:28 pm
by BANE » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:13 pm
by hunter101 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:30 pm
by BANE » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:13 pm
by Baragash » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:23 pm
BANE wrote:Make your own mind up who you think is in the wrong!
by BANE » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:26 pm
by Baragash » Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:18 am
Maddermax wrote:Found this bit interesting:Although Chapterhouse agrees that costs may be awarded under Rule 54(d) to the prevailing party, Chapterhouse disputes that Games Workshop is the “prevailing party” in this case or that Games Workshop obtained more “substantial relief” than Chapterhouse. Games Workshop brought 160 copyright claims against Chapterhouse and alleged trademark infringement of 125 alleged trademarks. After extensive litigation, Chapterhouse had prevailed on many of Games Workshop’s claims even before trial began. Under Rule 54(d), “[w]here there is a dismissal of an action, even where such dismissal is voluntary and without prejudice, the defendant is the prevailing party.” First Commodity Traders, Inc. v. Heinold Comoddities, Inc., 766 F.2d 1007, 1015 (7th Cir. 1985) quoting 6 J. Moore, W. Taggart & J. Wicker, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 54.70[4] (2d ed. 1985). At trial, Chapterhouse won on the majority of claims. And although the jury awarded $25,000 to Games Workshop, that was a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of dollars Games Workshop had initially sought. Far from showing it prevailed, the fact that Games Workshop was forced to make a demand for that small amount after years of litigation confirms it did not prevail. If it were otherwise, any plaintiff could simply change its damages request to an arbitrary small amount at trial just to call themselves a prevailing party. So, basically CHS is saying that because it won on most of the claims, it is the prevailling party, while GW is arguing that because it won on some claims it is the prevailing party.
Although Chapterhouse agrees that costs may be awarded under Rule 54(d) to the prevailing party, Chapterhouse disputes that Games Workshop is the “prevailing party” in this case or that Games Workshop obtained more “substantial relief” than Chapterhouse. Games Workshop brought 160 copyright claims against Chapterhouse and alleged trademark infringement of 125 alleged trademarks. After extensive litigation, Chapterhouse had prevailed on many of Games Workshop’s claims even before trial began. Under Rule 54(d), “[w]here there is a dismissal of an action, even where such dismissal is voluntary and without prejudice, the defendant is the prevailing party.” First Commodity Traders, Inc. v. Heinold Comoddities, Inc., 766 F.2d 1007, 1015 (7th Cir. 1985) quoting 6 J. Moore, W. Taggart & J. Wicker, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 54.70[4] (2d ed. 1985). At trial, Chapterhouse won on the majority of claims. And although the jury awarded $25,000 to Games Workshop, that was a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of dollars Games Workshop had initially sought. Far from showing it prevailed, the fact that Games Workshop was forced to make a demand for that small amount after years of litigation confirms it did not prevail. If it were otherwise, any plaintiff could simply change its damages request to an arbitrary small amount at trial just to call themselves a prevailing party.
by BANE » Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:57 am
Return to Other News
In association with Gaming Figures
Age of Strife