Originally Posted by
I can do case result searches on copyright lawsuits all day long but when it comes down to it, every court rules diffrently in diffrent situations so I just take things as they come and leave the final decision to a professional.
This is my way of thinking and the only reason I suggested everyone should take their questions to a trusted lawyer.
Your first statement simply is not true. Courts go out of their way to cite past cases in their opinions and how their decision does, or does not, follow those cases. If a case does not follow precedent that court must justify its decision. Precedent is very important to the courts. Without precedent we would have chaos in the courts. Judges do not like being overturned by a higher court so they are very careful in their citations.
By your logic, the Miranda decision would have been overturned years ago by a lower court but it is still there. 90% of cases never go to trial because lawyers know the futility of fighting what numerous courts have already settled many times.
We have encountered more than one misinformed lawyer who tried to state that the first sale doctrine is copyright law only and does not apply to trademarked goods. They are practicing idiots. I can show you a number of federal court cases where the judges have flatly stated the first sale doctrine does apply to trademarks.
When we were sued by M&M/Mars in 2002, every lawyer we contacted told us we had no case. We fought back and M&M/Mars dropped the lawsuit.
We do not just look for cases that just support our views as you seem to insinuate.