Bloomberg: "Lindt Defends Chocolate Bunny Rights in Eurpose at Top EU Court":

Lindt & Spruengli AG's European trademark rights on a chocolate Easter bunny wrapped in gold foil were gained ``honestly and fairly'' and it should be able to block copies, Lindt told the European Union's highest court.

MediaPost.com: Searchers Led Away From Brand Sites:

More than one in 10 U.S. Internet searches for leading brands end up clicking away from the brand owner's Web site, according to a recent report from research firm Hitwise.

Memo from McCain's Motion to Dismiss Copyright Action brought by jackson Browne re McCain campaign's use of 'Running on Empty.'

A. Browne's Copyright Infringement Claims Are Barred By The
Fair Use Doctrine

1. The First Factor, The Purpose And Character Of The Use,
Favors McCain Because The Use Was Made In A Non-
Commercial Political Message About Matters Of Public
Concern And Was Transformative

2. The Second Factor, The Nature Of The Copyrighted Work,
Favors McCain

3.The Third Factor, The Amount and Substantiality Of The
Use, Favors McCain

4.The Fourth Factor, The Effect Of The Use On The Potential
Market For Or Value Of Plaintiff's Work, Favors McCain

B. Browne's Lanham Act Claim Fails As A Matter Of Law

1.The Lanham Act Does Not Apply To Political Speech

2.Browne's Lanham Act Claim Is Barred By The "Artistic
Relevance" Test Imposed By The First Amendment

3.As A Matter Of Law, There Can Be No Likelihood Of
Confusion Stemming From The Political Video

I received a solicitation today to become a UK solicitor from these folk. I'd rather 'take silk' and become a barrister so that I can wear the robe and the horse hair wig. I could use the wig. The trips to court might be onerous.

. . . I was tempted to add "and Mindless." In any event, here is a discussion of how well designed the Drudge Report is.

Legal Pad: "Tiny Law Firm Sues Google Over Search Results":

The problems began with Google after Oct. 15, according to the firm’s trademark infringement suit filed in federal court last week. That’s when Powlen and Berger began punching “Global Law, 94105” into Google – let’s be honest who among you doesn’t spend most of the work day Googling your name? They did this on “several different dates” and found that the first search result read “Global Law, LLP” but linked to another law firm. Legal Pad tried it last week and found that indeed it linked to SF’s Schinner Law Group, which happens to be Powlen’s old firm.

From here.

The wife and I like to kick back with a case of scotch and a couple of cartons of Lucky Strikes and watch Mad Men. I mentioned on Twitter last night that I was watching Mad Men and lo and behold this morning I receive an email that "Betty Draper" is now following me (Betty Draper is a character on the show). I wasn't able to determine whether this was a clever promotion on the part of the show or something else. This post suggests that it is a case of 'fanjacking.'

Previous discussion of Betty's husband Don Draper on Twitter here.

p.s. 'Following' someone on Twitter means subscribing to their updates. Because Twitter sends an email to a user notifying that they have a new follower, and that email contains a link to the follower's page, subscribing to strangers en masse has become a promotional (and often spamming) technique.

User entries on social networking cites are potentially discoverable. HT RC.