Issue No. 014
June 10, 2026
New York
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IP Briefing · by ESCA Legal
|
|
|
|
| The Ninth Circuit granted en banc rehearing in the long-running copyright case over Kat Von D's Miles Davis tattoo, vacating the panel opinion and reopening a major substantial-similarity question. |
| § | The case centers on a tattoo based on photographer Jeffrey Sedlik's Miles Davis portrait and whether the tattoo and related posts infringed the photograph. | | § | A Los Angeles jury found no infringement, and a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel had affirmed before the full court agreed to rehear the case. | | § | The en banc order vacates the panel opinion, meaning the earlier appellate result no longer controls while the full court reviews the case. | | § | The rehearing could reshape how courts in the Ninth Circuit compare protected and unprotected elements when assessing substantial similarity. |
|
| Continue reading → |
| § ESCA Takeaway |
| This issue tracks how familiar creative assets, from tattoos and luxury motifs to public murals and recorded performances, can become high-stakes IP disputes when they are reused in new commercial settings. |
|
|
| More IP Stories |
|
| § Trademark · Filed |
|
|
| Chrome Hearts filed a California federal lawsuit accusing Nordstrom of selling belts and jewelry that allegedly copy its registered cross-design marks. |
| § | The complaint alleges trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false designation of origin, and unfair competition. | | § | Chrome Hearts says its CH Cross and CH Plus designs have become source identifiers through long use, promotion, and consumer recognition. | | § | Nordstrom is expected to press the line between ornamentation and trademark use, because cross motifs are common in fashion and jewelry. | | § | The case asks whether a design element can remain decorative while also functioning as a protected brand signal. |
|
|
Why it matters
Luxury brands often depend on visual signatures that sit between decoration and source identification. This dispute gives courts another chance to define how much control a brand can claim over familiar design language.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| Artist Robert Wyland filed a lawsuit after his long-standing Dallas Ocean Life mural was painted over in connection with a 2026 World Cup promotional project. |
| § | Wyland says the mural was erased without notice or consent after decades as a public artwork in Dallas. | | § | The lawsuit invokes the Visual Artists Rights Act, which can protect works of recognized stature from intentional or negligent destruction. | | § | The dispute names FIFA and has also drawn attention to the roles of local World Cup organizers, city-linked entities, and property stakeholders. | | § | Work on the replacement mural has stopped while the parties dispute responsibility for the decision. |
|
|
Why it matters
Public art can carry federal rights even when it lives on someone else's wall. The case is a practical warning for event sponsors, cities, landlords, and agencies using cultural spaces for brand activations.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| The American Federation of Musicians sued Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group, claiming the labels licensed recordings for AI training without paying or identifying covered session musicians. |
| § | The lawsuit alleges breach of a collective bargaining agreement tied to new uses of recorded performances. | | § | The union says recordings involving represented musicians were licensed to Suno and Udio without required compensation or disclosure. | | § | The dispute follows earlier copyright litigation between major labels and AI music companies that later produced licensing deals. | | § | The labels have framed the issue as part of ongoing bargaining and negotiations. |
|
|
Why it matters
AI licensing does not only raise copyright-owner questions. It also pressures contracts, performer rights, and revenue-sharing systems that were built before training-data deals became a commercial product.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
QUICK HITS
| § Copyright | A California federal court issued a tentative ruling that would favor Twitch streamer Denims in Ethan Klein's reaction-video copyright suit, though the matter remained under submission at publication time. [source] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|