Issue No. 031
July 22, 2026
New York
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IP Briefing · by ESCA Legal
|
|
|
|
| A California federal judge declined to dismiss trademark and unfair competition claims against Paramount and World of Wonder in a dispute over the performer name Lexi Love. |
| § | The dispute involves Selena Scola, who registered LEXI LOVE, and Clair Barnes, who performed under the same name on RuPaul's Drag Race. | | § | Scola brought third party claims against Paramount and World of Wonder for contributory trademark infringement and unfair competition. | | § | The studios argued that their use was expressive and protected under the First Amendment. | | § | The court found that the alleged conduct involved use of Lexi Love as a mark and allowed the claims to continue past the dismissal stage. |
|
| Continue reading → |
| § ESCA Takeaway |
| Names, packaging, artwork, and recorded music each create different ownership questions. This issue tracks how courts are testing source identification, filing deadlines, and the scope of copyright claims across entertainment and consumer brands. |
|
|
| More IP Stories |
|
| § Trade Dress · Update |
|
|
| A New York federal court awarded Van Leeuwen Ice Cream approximately $23.8 million in Rebel Creamery profits after a bench trial over allegedly confusing ice cream pint packaging. |
| § | Van Leeuwen asserted rights in the overall combination of monochromatic pints and lids, pastel colors, black script lettering, descriptive text, and minimalist design. | | § | The court found that differences in the companies' names and product positioning did not outweigh the overall packaging similarities. | | § | Rebel was permanently barred from selling products in packaging likely to be confused with Van Leeuwen's trade dress and was ordered to redesign the packaging. | | § | The court concluded that Rebel did not adequately separate profits attributable to other factors from profits connected to the challenged packaging. |
|
|
Why it matters
Trade dress can protect the combined commercial impression of familiar design elements, even when no single color, font, or layout is unique. The remedy also shows how profit apportionment can become decisive after liability is established.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Update |
|
|
| The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of Michael Hayden's copyright case against Jeff Koons, holding that the claim over a sculpture depicted in the Made in Heaven series was filed too late. |
| § | Hayden created a sculpture that appeared in photographs, paintings, and sculptures from Koons's Made in Heaven series. | | § | The district court found that Hayden should have discovered the alleged infringement more than three years before filing suit. | | § | The appeals court rejected Hayden's request for a heightened knowledge standard under the discovery rule. | | § | The ruling leaves the dismissal in place without reaching whether Koons's works made fair use of the sculpture. |
|
|
Why it matters
Copyright owners can lose a claim before a court reaches copying or fair use if available facts should have prompted an earlier investigation. Publicly exhibited works can make that timing analysis especially important.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| Sony Music and nine affiliated labels filed a second copyright lawsuit against Udio, asserting more than 30,000 sound recordings that the court did not allow Sony to add to its original case. |
| § | The new complaint identifies 30,117 sound recordings that Sony claims were copied to train Udio's generative music models. | | § | A June ruling denied Sony permission to add the recordings to the original case but stated that the labels could pursue the claims in another action. | | § | The complaint includes claims involving post 1972 recordings, pre 1972 recordings, and alleged circumvention of YouTube protections. | | § | Sony seeks statutory damages and an injunction, while Udio has argued in the original litigation that its training use is fair use. |
|
|
Why it matters
A denied amendment did not end the additional recording claims. The separate complaint shows how discovery in one AI training case can generate a second action involving a much larger catalog.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not subscribed? Sign up for future editions of Marked by ESCA Legal.
|
|
|
|
This newsletter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Published by ESCA Legal. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Attorney advertising; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
|