>>13852800this is some desperate cope. it seems the case was dropped after an interim injunction to stop the g-raver distributing the shirts utterly failed. if you read the text you can see why. the judge basically btfo of all the arguments cuck's lawyer was trying to make.
>For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Cornette's Motion and holds that: (1) Cornette has failed to establish a likelihood of success on his trademark claims because G-Raver did not engage in commercial speech subject to the Lanham Act; (2) even if G-Raver did engage in commercial speech subject to the Lanham Act, Cornette has not established a likelihood of success on his trademark claims because there is no likelihood of confusion between Cornette's merchandise and the Shirts, Cornette has not shown that his name is sufficiently famous as a mark to be protected from dilution, Cornette has shown no likelihood of dilution, Cornette has failed to show that G-Raver acted in bad faith in registering and using websites that incorporate his name, and because his state trademark claims depend on his Lanham Act claims, has failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on that claim also; (3) both the First Amendment and Pennsylvania's right of publicity statute protect the Shirts as expressive conduct; (4) Cornette has failed to show that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief; (5) the balance of equities disfavors an injunction; and (6) an injunction is not in the public interest.the other target of the lawsuit, the online retailer, had the suit summarily dismissed earlier in proceedings. seems stephen p hutz couldn't make a case that the retailer had potentially even done anything that you can sue over, but they decided to sue anyway. kwab.
