Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law

@markjkings

Lawyer representing creatives in California and New York Copyright. Trademarks. Helping artists get their copyrights back. Asterisks everywhere. More links:

466 Following952 Followers2,637 Posts

YouTube Bluesky

Is this your profile?Claim it and markjkings.dirty.social is yours.Claim profile

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· 20d

In the quote post I made a joke about what would happen when these two ice cream brands are at the supermarket. Now I'm reading the opinion and I see that it genuinely happened and Van Leeuwen used it as evidence.

Van Leeuen ice cream pints side by side on freezer shelf with Rebel Ice cream. Both are in solid pastels

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

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· 20d

Ha ha I'm reading the opinion and it turns out this really happened and Van Leeuwen used it as evidence

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

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· 22d

This is part of an opinion where a court dismissed a complaint sua sponte as an impermissible shotgun pleading. I wasn't able to view the complaint, but I suppose I'm missing I'm something because what the court describes here is what I see in nearly every complaint? (case and docket in AltText)

Relevant here is the “most common type” of shotgun complaint, one in
which the plaintiff asserts “multiple counts where each count adopts the
allegations of all preceding counts, causing each successive count to carry all
that came before and the last count to be a combination of the entire complaint.”
See Weiland, 792 F.3d 1313, 1321, 1321 n.11 (collecting cases). As a result,
“most of the counts … contain irrelevant factual allegations and legal
conclusions.” Strategic Income Fund, L.L.C. v. Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Corp.,
305 F.3d 1293, 1295 (11th Cir. 2002). Consequently, in ruling on the sufficiency
of a claim, the Court is faced with the onerous task of sifting out irrelevancies
in order to decide for itself which facts are relevant to a particular cause of
action asserted. See id. Here, in each successive claim for relief in the

Vazquez v. Positiva Entertainment, 26-cv-01523 (MD Fla)

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· May 18

DOJ website. May 18, 2026. April 28, 2026.

“The machinery of government should never be weaponized against any American, and it is this Department’s intention to make right the wrongs that were previously done while ensuring this never happens again,” said Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. “As part of this settlement, we are setting up a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress.”

“The use of government power to target individuals or entities for improper and unlawful political, personal, or ideological reasons should not be tolerated by any Administration,” said Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter.

Press Release
Federal Grand Jury Indicts Former FBI Director James Comey for Threats to Harm President Trump

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Apr 14

The Best Mattresses for Stomach Sleepers
Stomach sleeping may seem straightforward enough, but these sleepers often require an extra dose of back support. These are the models I recommend.

The Best Streaming Deal of April 2026 Is a $3 a Month Starz Deal

WIRED posts links to products from online retailers we recommend independently. If you choose to click a link on our pages and then purchase a product on the retailers website, code in the link includes a signal for the retailer to send us a small percentage of the money spent. This is known as an affiliate commission. Our affiliate program functions independently of our editorial and newsgathering functions. Our staff does not cover products because they are available at a particular retailer.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Apr 7

I thought it would be a one-time post, not evergreen

(((Mark Jaffe))), 5 Bridges Law @MarkJKings Jan 6, 2021
This is a dark day in American history and also did you get a chance to review that redline I sent you

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Apr 7

This it in Blake Lively v. Wayfarer Studios isn't essential the holding, but I'm sure it was important to entertainment industries that it's in there

The analysis is not indifferent to congressional intent. A person who may be deemed an
independent contractor for purposes of the work-for-hire provisions of the Copyright Act, where
“the rights to intellectual property can depend on contractual terms,” may nonetheless be an

employee for purposes of Title VII, where Congress intended to create ‘“public law’ rights [that]
were vested in workers as a class . . . [and] not subject to waiver or sale by individuals.”

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Apr 2

Justices Kagan and Sotomayor raised this issue Pages 41-42 www.supremecourt.gov/oral_argumen...

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: When we ruled in
Thind that Indians could not become citizens,
the government then after began to unnaturalize
many Indians who had been sworn in as citizens.
You asked us to concentrate only on
the prospective nature of the citizens order,
but the logic of your position, if accepted, is
that the next president -- this president or
the next president or a Congress or someone
else could decide that it shouldn't be
prospective. There would be nothing limiting
that according to your theory.
GENERAL SAUER: If, as we ask, the
Court confines its ruling to prospective relief
only, which I take exception to that -JUSTICE
SOTOMAYOR: No, I'm
saying
to
you,
don't
--
yeah, that's what you're asking
us for relief right now. I'm asking whether
the logic of your theory would permit what
happened after the Court's decision in Thind
that the government could move to unnaturalize
people who were born here of illegal residents.
GENERAL SAUER: No. We believe the
Court should do what it did in Sessions agains

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Mar 30

Is there some bluebook rule that requires them to separate "copyrights" like "cop-" and "yrights"? It's so frustratingly awkward.

The Fourth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part.
It affirmed as to contributory liability because Cox contin-
ued to
provide Internet service to known infringers.
Apply-
ing Circuit
precedent, it
reasoned that
“supplying a
product

with knowledge that the recipient will use it to infringe
cop-
yrights is
exactly the
sort of
culpable conduct
sufficient for
contributory infringement.” 93 F. 4th 222, 236 (2024) (cit-

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 20

That man appeared on my feed, so the rule is I have to share a photo of a dog

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 13

In November 2016, the Trump campaign sued in Nevada over supposed illegal voting. Among their evidence: "signs written in Spanish". Don't believe for a second that their calls to "nationalize" elections, voter ID, SAVE Act, anything else, won't be used as weapons.

[tweet] (((Mark Jaffe))), 5 Bridges Law @MarkJKings Nov 8, 2016When filing an emergency motion, do a last minute check for proper citation, compliance with local rules, and not including racist crap. [text from complaint] 16. When Mr. Chamberlain arrived at 9:40 pm, he personally witnessed Democrat candidate for Senate, Catherine Cortez Masto, speaking to approximately 20-30 individuals, some of whom were carrying signs in Spanish. He entered the store and witnessed the voting area, where 2 or 3 people were standing in line waiting to vote and a cameraman and reporter from Fox 5 News were standing nearby.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 11

A ghost story litigation in two parts. * Alterian Ghost Factory creates animatronic and prosthetic makeup and masks for movies and tv shows and Daft Punk. They claim copyright in the mask below, Fig. 2. Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 are masks from the Scream franchise

Two ghost masks with the hollowed out eyes and mouth Fig 8 and 9

Ghost mask with hollowed out eyes and mouth Fig 2

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 4

Another interesting wrinkle. There's only one declaratory judgment claim but the relief sought includes a declaration regarding the copyright - and - the trademark. This it at least the second time I've seen a complaint implicating the source-identifying function of a graffiti artist's tag * 7/

a. Michaels’ use of POSE’s artwork did not infringe, and would not infringe, either
directly or indirectly, any valid, enforceable, or protectable copyright registration
(if it exists).
b. Michaels’ use of POSE’s artwork and its conduct described herein does not
constitute unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).
c. Michaels’ use of POSE’s artwork has not violated and is not violating any state or
federal law.
d. Declaring Michaels the prevailing party and this case as exceptional, and awarding
Michaels its reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to, among other things, 15 U.S.C.
§ 1117(a) and 17 U.S.C. § 505.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 4

Copyright lawyers will recognize how misleading this paragraph is. It alleges that POSE claims copyright protection but hasn't provided evidence and hasn't shown that it was registered. 3/

15. POSE has claimed copyright protection for his artwork but has failed to provide
evidence sufficient to establish the existence of a valid and registered copyright for the work.
Although Michaels disputed POSE’s claims that it did not have the right to use the artwork,
Michaels removed the artwork from its displays. During the time Michaels used the display, no
copyright registration for the artwork existed. Upon information and belief, no copyright was
registered until January 2026. See Exhibit A.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Feb 4

For a long time I've been interested in graffiti copyright. This lawsuit has a twist: retailer Michaels Stores is suing graffiti artist POSE, seeking a declaratory judgment that it isn't infringing the artist's copyright 1/

POSE graffiti on a wall, on an Ironlak webpage

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 30

MAGA’s legacy

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 28

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 28

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 27

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 16

Heads up trademark people. TTAB opinion: we don't think much of expert witness because, among other things, he used "trademarking" as a verb.

TTAB LEXIS 84, at *3. While Professor Bond may be an expert in marketing and branding,
it is apparent from a review of his testimonial declaration that he is not an expert in
trademark matters much less on the registrability of trademarks under the Trademark Act
and the problems and considerations related thereto. This is readily apparent from his
inability to appreciate the difference between the Examining Attorney’s refusal based on
mere descriptiveness and his genericness advisory, and his reference to “trademarking” as a
verb. January 27, 2025 Request for Reconsideration, TSDR at 29-30 (Bond Decl. at ¶ 18) (“If

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Jan 4

Mister Softee sighting in San Jose. (I used to represent them in New York, but this might be the first time I saw them in California)

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Dec 24

See what I mean?

In 2022, Twitter, Inc. once again became a private company—purchased for
approximately $44 billion, by and through two entities—X Holdings I, Inc. and X Holdings II,

Inc. By March 2023, the TWITTER product and Twitter Inc.’s assets were consolidated under

the newly formed X Corp.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 24

Plaintiff owns several registered trademarks for the CALL YOUR MOTHER trademark and logo. And yes, both places are Jewish-owned, which is discussed in the complaint:

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 13

I really wonder if this should've been included? It doesn't seem essentially to the complaint. It just reminds be of a controversy I hadn't really thought about, and I wouldn't have associated the photographer with it. It's Streisanding something that isn't even material to the lawsuit.

14. On information and belief, Defendant Graham also selected to affiliate
himself with Plaintiff’s Original Work for an additional reason, namely that Plaintiff
was publicly vilified for his role in a controversial Balenciaga advertisement involving
false allegations of glorifying pedophilia.
15. Plaintiff was ultimately publicly vindicated in a defamation lawsuit
abroad related to the false accusations arising from the Balenciaga advertisement.
16. During the initial Balenciaga scandal, media articles, websites, posts, and
news segments would display Plaintiff’s photographs from THE AMERIGUNS
Project alongside Plaintiff’s photos from the Balenciaga ad.
17. Given Kendrick Lamar’s lyrics directed as calling Defendant Graham a
pedophile and Defendant Graham’s now dismissed defamation lawsuit, on information
and belief, Defendant Graham sought to imply that he, like Plaintiff, would be publicly
exonerated.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 13

Something is the same: do you remember the Ameriguns series, where people posed with their carefully arranged enormous gun collections? The photographer is suing Drake for copyright infringement, over alleged similarities in Drake's "What Did I Miss" music video.

Left photo. Lots of guns meticulously arranged around an in ground swimming pool. Guy is firing a gun like it's a flame thrower.

Right photo: image from a TV screen. Lots of guns meticulously arranged around an in ground swimming pool. Drake is posing

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 10

Years from now, people are gonna be confused reading the Supreme Court's opinion in Warhol v. Goldsmith. A lawsuit over a photo of Prince, who's not a party, citing Cariou v. Prince who's a different Prince. And the Court uses a Campbell's soup can an example, citing its Campbell decision.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 5

I don't know if it's still there but this is what the United States Department of Commerce said about tariffs when I screencapped this in January www.trade.gov/import-tarif...

A tariff or duty (the words are used interchangeably) is a tax levied by governments on the value including freight and insurance of imported products. Different tariffs applied on different products by different countries.
National sales and local taxes, and in some instances customs fees, are often charged in addition to the tariff.
The tariff, along with the other assessments, is collected at the time of customs clearance in the foreign port. Tariffs and taxes increase the cost of your product to the foreign buyer and may affect your competitiveness in the market. So knowing the final cost to your buyer can help you price your product for that market. In addition, your buyer may ask you to quote an estimate of these costs before making the purchase.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Nov 5

Second, look at this proposed class. The Nationwide Class could be every single artist and rights holder with music on Spotify - except for Drake. That would make him really not like us. 5/9

25 Nationwide Class
26 All residents of the United States of America who, during
27 the period January 1, 2018, through the present, possessed
28 royalties rights for on-demand digital media content that
was hosted by Spotify (Rights Holders), and whose
2 royalties and subscription revenue shares were diminished
3 as a consequence of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct.
4 California Sub-Class
5 All residents of the State of California who, during the
6 period January 1, 2018, through the present, possessed
7 royalties rights for on-demand digital media content that
8 was hosted by Spotify (Rights Holders), and whose
9 royalties and subscription revenue shares were diminished
10 as a consequence of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct.

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Oct 29

Ingrassia's opening paragraph really seems like a self-own, doesn't it?

1. This is a case about a man who practices a deeply hypocritical form of
misogyny. But, in an ironic twist, that man is not the Plaintiff, Paul J. Ingrassia. No,

Mark Jaffe, 5 Bridges Law@markjkings· Oct 24

5. At the Supreme Court, Supreme Court is Considering Sometimes the headlines means someone filed a petition for the Supreme Court to hear the case (writ of certiorari), but it hasn't granted certiorari yet. SCOTUS rejects most of the petitions, usually without explaining why.