Reposted by Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law
The Third Circuit's opinion in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence is now available: www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/252... #copyright #ai #fairuse
Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law
@markjkings.bsky.social
957 followers 468 following 2.7K posts
Lawyer representing creatives in California and New York Copyright. Trademarks. Helping artists get their copyrights back. Asterisks everywhere. 5bridgeslaw.com More links: linktr.ee/markj5bridgeslaw
![i.
Consumer Confusion
Here, Van Leeuwen did introduce substantial anecdotal
evidence indicating actual confusion. For instance, Rebel
itself received a report from a confused consumer in August
2024. She wrote that her husband purchased Rebel “by accident
when I sent him to the store for Van Leeuwen,” because “your
product was placed right next to Van Leeuwen and looked the same
. . . . I nearly did the same thing when I shopped! Later, my
friend shared the same experience on the other side of the
country!” JX33. This single incident, anecdotal though it may
be, remains meaningfully probative: such reports are expected to
be rare when the products at issue are inexpensive and
consumers’ incentive to complain about confusion is therefore
diminished. Coty, 277 F. Supp. 3d at 453 (“[C]ommon sense](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:64ruyhhfjvjkoix3uoe7uhfi/bafkreifhjinq6kbslv3s5c54vifkpcf3wpodd4z5vbp4gryw3leh64yy4u)
