Question

In: Operations Management

Already LLC v. Nike Inc, U.S. Supreme Court. Trademark fight over top-selling Air Force 1 sneakers....

Already LLC v. Nike Inc, U.S. Supreme Court. Trademark fight over top-selling Air Force 1 sneakers. Investigate this case including the facts of the case, the positions argued on both sides, the law(s) at issue, the ultimate outcome and conclude with your personal analysis of the court's ruling / outcome. Also, be sure to discuss the historical impact of case/scandal on society

Solutions

Expert Solution

Nike Inc had maintained to file a case against Already LLC for selling the shoes that was reportedly infringed on the trademark of the Nike which cover the air force 1 shoe line. The company Yums had counterclaimed to cancel the nike trademark. After which the yums made such a statement , nike had decided to drop its claim and give a word to the yums that they would not assert its trademark against the yums's existing or old products. The court had dismissed the yums's claim over the nike and thus yums had argued that a counterversy still remains after the nike's promise not to file case as because their trademark still continue to hinder the ability of the yums to get competed in the footwear business.Nike also argues that just as a court cannot witness a claim on trademark without having a controversy. The supreme court's decision can determine if the intellectual property owners can drop the actions of infringement without having words to defend the counterclaims for challenging the intellectual property rights.

The case came into existence on July 2009 which was for trademark dilution, trademark infringement and other claims. Nike had claimed to hold several trademark registrations for the footwear including the US trademark registration. As of November 2009, yums counterclaimed for a judgement which says that the 905 registration was not of a trademark. The court had held a hearing for determining whether it could still maintain a jurisdiction over the yums counterclaims. Nike had also made a move to dismiss yums's counterclaims for the subject matter lacking jurisdiction and for dismissing their own claims voluntarily.

The decision of the supreme court under this case will get influenced with the decisions related to the business for both intellectual property rights holders and their competitors. The decision can also affect the ways under which the public guard itself from the invalid grants of the intellectual property rights.


Related Solutions

Case 16.3 Stonhard, Inc. v. Blue Ridge Farms, LLC New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second...
Case 16.3 Stonhard, Inc. v. Blue Ridge Farms, LLC New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 114 A.D.3d 757, 980 N.Y.S.2d 507 (2014). Background and Facts Who is liable when the installer of food plant flooring is not paid? Stonhard, Inc., makes epoxy and urethane flooring and installs it in industrial and commercial buildings. Marvin Sussman entered into a contract with Stonhard to install flooring at Blue Ridge Farms, LLC, a food-manufacturing facility in Brooklyn, New York. Sussman did...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT