Latest news with #intellectualProperty
Reuters
a day ago
- Business
- Reuters
Lululemon sues Costco for allegedly ripping off clothing designs
June 27 (Reuters) - Canadian athletic wear maker Lululemon (LULU.O), opens new tab sued Costco (COST.O), opens new tab in California federal court on Friday, alleging that the wholesaler sells "knockoff" sweatshirts, jackets and pants that unlawfully copy its products. The lawsuit said that Costco's "dupes" violate Lululemon's patent and trademark rights in its clothing designs and are likely to confuse potential customers. Spokespeople for Costco did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. "We take the responsibility of protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights very seriously and pursue the appropriate legal action when necessary," a Lululemon spokesperson said in a statement. The complaint alleged that Costco sells clothes under its label Kirkland that copy Lululemon's Scuba hoodies, Define jackets and ABC pants. It cited articles from The New York Times and The Washington Post calling Costco's products "dupes" of Lululemon's and said that the similar designs could confuse buyers into thinking that Lululemon made them for Costco's private label. "Indeed, one of the purposes of selling 'dupes' is to confuse consumers" into believing that they are the authentic products, the lawsu it said. Lululemon requested an unspecified amount of monetary damages and a court order forcing Costco to stop selling the clothes. The case is Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc v. Costco Wholesale Corp, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, No. 2:25-cv-05864. For Lululemon: Ali Razai and Brandon Smith of Morgan Lewis & Bockius For Costco: attorney information not yet available
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Why Light & Wonder Stock Blasted 10% Higher Today
The company had a good day in court. It's being sued by a peer who's alleging intellectual property misappropriation. 10 stocks we like better than Light & Wonder › Gaming technology stock Light & Wonder (NASDAQ: LNW) -- formerly known as Scientific Games -- proved to be quite the solid bet on Wednesday. On some very positive news in the legal sphere, investors piled into the company's shares, pumping them more than 10% higher in price. That looked especially good when compared to the S&P 500's (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) flatline performance. Light & Wonder is currently locked in a legal dispute with peer company Aristocrat Leisure. Aristocrat is accusing it of copying elements from one of its casino slot games in the design of Light & Wonder's Dragon Train game. On Wednesday, the Nevada court in which the case is being heard made a ruling on discovery that favors Light & Wonder. It ruled that the company will not have to reveal its math models on the slot games in question. In addition, the court asked for specificity from Aristocrat regarding the trade secrets it's litigating to protect. Aristocrat, which is headquartered in Australia, brought its case against the American company in 2024. At the time, it stated in a press release that it "will seek all appropriate remedies to address the harm caused by Light & Wonder's actions." Light & Wonder had, understandably, been fairly quiet about the case. Perhaps it'll speak up more now that it seems to be tilting in its favor. Having said that, I wouldn't be ready to break out the champagne if I were a shareholder, at least not yet. Court cases can develop and resolve in unexpected ways, and Light & Wonder isn't out of the woods. I don't think anyone should buy or sell the company's stock based on predictions of the lawsuit's outcome. Before you buy stock in Light & Wonder, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Light & Wonder wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $689,813!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $906,556!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 809% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 175% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Light & Wonder. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Why Light & Wonder Stock Blasted 10% Higher Today was originally published by The Motley Fool
Al Arabiya
3 days ago
- Business
- Al Arabiya
Getty Drops Copyright Allegations in UK Lawsuit Against Stability AI
Getty Images dropped copyright infringement allegations from its lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI as closing arguments began Wednesday at Britain's High Court. Seattle-based Getty's decision to abandon the copyright claim removes a key part of its lawsuit against Stability AI, which owns a popular AI image-making tool called Stable Diffusion. The two have been facing off in a widely watched court case that could have implications for the creative and technology industries. Tech companies have been training their AI systems on vast troves of writings or images available online, citing fair use or fair dealing legal doctrines in the US and UK. Getty was among the first to challenge those practices with copyright infringement lawsuits in the US and the UK in early 2023. In its lawsuit, Getty alleged that Stability's use of its images infringed its intellectual property rights, including copyright, trademark, and database rights. However, Getty's move indicates that the company didn't think its copyright allegations would succeed. After witness and expert testimony, Getty made the pragmatic decision to pursue only the claims for trademark infringement, passing off, and secondary infringement of copyright, according to a written copy of its closing arguments. Getty continues to accuse Stability of infringing its trademark because its AI model was trained on images that included Getty's watermarks, which were sometimes reproduced by the image generator. Getty also alleges that Stability indirectly infringed its copyright because even if Stability's AI models were trained outside of Britain, it still faces local laws if the models produced images in the country. But Stability has argued that because training of the AI model technically happened elsewhere on computers run by US tech giant Amazon, the case doesn't belong in the UK. London-based Stability said welcomed Getty's move. 'We are pleased to see Getty's decision to drop multiple claims after the conclusion of testimony,' the company said in a statement. 'We are grateful for the time and effort the UK court has put forth to address the important matters in this case. We look forward to the court's final judgment.' Closing arguments are expected to last until the end of the week. A written decision from the judge expected at a later date.
Associated Press
3 days ago
- Business
- Associated Press
Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI
LONDON (AP) — Getty Images dropped copyright infringement allegations from its lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI as closing arguments began Wednesday in the landmark case at Britain's High Court. Seattle-based Getty's decision to abandon the copyright claim removes a key part of its lawsuit against Stability AI, which owns a popular AI image-making tool called Stable Diffusion. The two have been facing off in a widely watched court case that could have implications for the creative and technology industries. Tech companies have been training their AI systems on vast troves of writings or images available online, citing 'fair use' or 'fair dealing' legal doctrines in the United States and United Kingdom. Getty was among the first to challenge those practices with copyright infringement lawsuits in the United States and the United Kingdom in early 2023. In its lawsuit, Getty alleged that Stability's use of its images infringed its intellectual property rights, including copyright, trademark and database rights. However, Getty's move indicates that the company didn't think its copyright allegations would succeed. After witness and expert testimony, Getty made the 'pragmatic decision to pursue only the claims for trade mark infringement, passing off and secondary infringement of copyright,' according to a written copy of its closing arguments. Getty continues to accuse Stability of infringing its trademark because its AI model was trained on images that included Getty's watermarks, which were sometimes reproduced by the image generator. Getty also alleges that Stability indirectly infringed its copyright because even if Stability's AI models were trained outside of Britain, it still faces local laws if the models produced images in the country. But Stability has argued that because training of the AI model technically happened elsewhere, on computers run by U.S. tech giant Amazon, the case doesn't belong in the United Kingdom. London-based Stability said welcomed Getty's move. 'We are pleased to see Getty's decision to drop multiple claims after the conclusion of testimony,' the company said in a statement. 'We are grateful for the time and effort the UK court has put forth to address the important matters in this case. We look forward to the court's final judgment.' Closing arguments are expected to last until the end of the week. A written decision from the judge expected at a later date.
The Independent
3 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI
Getty Images dropped copyright infringement allegations from its lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI as closing arguments began Wednesday in the landmark case at Britain's High Court. Seattle-based Getty's decision to abandon the copyright claim removes a key part of its lawsuit against Stability AI, which owns a popular AI image-making tool called Stable Diffusion. The two have been facing off in a widely watched court case that could have implications for the creative and technology industries. Tech companies have been training their AI systems on vast troves of writings or images available online, citing 'fair use' or 'fair dealing' legal doctrines in the United States and United Kingdom. Getty was among the first to challenge those practices with copyright infringement lawsuits in the United States and the United Kingdom in early 2023. In its lawsuit, Getty alleged that Stability's use of its images infringed its intellectual property rights, including copyright, trademark and database rights. However, Getty's move indicates that the company didn't think its copyright allegations would succeed. After witness and expert testimony, Getty made the 'pragmatic decision to pursue only the claims for trade mark infringement, passing off and secondary infringement of copyright,' according to a written copy of its closing arguments. Getty continues to accuse Stability of infringing its trademark because its AI model was trained on images that included Getty's watermarks, which were sometimes reproduced by the image generator. Getty also alleges that Stability indirectly infringed its copyright because even if Stability's AI models were trained outside of Britain, it still faces local laws if the models produced images in the country. But Stability has argued that because training of the AI model technically happened elsewhere, on computers run by U.S. tech giant Amazon, the case doesn't belong in the United Kingdom. London-based Stability said welcomed Getty's move. 'We are pleased to see Getty's decision to drop multiple claims after the conclusion of testimony,' the company said in a statement. "We are grateful for the time and effort the UK court has put forth to address the important matters in this case. We look forward to the court's final judgment.' Closing arguments are expected to last until the end of the week. A written decision from the judge expected at a later date.
