Make Some Sense of Scent Trademarks: The United States Needs a Graphical Representation Requirement

Make Some Sense of Scent Trademarks: The United States Needs a Graphical Representation Requirement

Read Full Article (PDF)

 

 

 

 

Make Some Sense of Scent Trademarks: The United States Needs a Graphical Representation Requirement

When it comes to consumer loyalty, some businesses have decided to go beyond attracting the eyes. Why not keep customers via their nostrils? Accordingly, the scent marketing industry is booming. Jennifer Dublino, Vice President of Development at ScentWorld Events, remarks that “smell is one of the most unique of human senses. Scent enters the limbic system [of the brain] and bypasses all of the cognitive and logical thought processes and goes directly to the emotional and memory areas of the brain.” Companies like ScentAir have been created specifically to help stores design fragrances that best fit their image and objectives as a way to increase returns on investment. 

Science indicates that olfactory cues are more effective than visual cues at triggering memory. Scents’ strong ties to memory and emotions can make them a powerful branding tool. A study found that gamblers spent forty-five percent more money when there was a floral scent present around a slot machine than when there was not. Four hundred consumers, who were surveyed after shopping
in a Nike store, reported that a “pleasant ambient scent” improved not only their evaluation of the store and its products but the likelihood they would shop there again. Some human rights activists have even suggested that using scents to identify goods could be beneficial to those who are visually impaired and are not able to reap the benefits of visual trademarks.6 Overall, scents appear to both attract customers and increase their affinity to a particular good or service from a specific source, much like a mesmerizing logo or catchy slogan.

Gabrielle E. Brill

J.D. Candidate, 2022, University of Richmond School of Law

B.A., magna cum laude, 2018, Dickinson College

 

 

 

 

Applying Products Liability Law to Facebook’s Platform and Algorithms: Addiction, Radicalization, and Real-World Harm

Applying Products Liability Law to Facebook’s Platform and Algorithms: Addiction, Radicalization, and Real-World Harm

Read Full Article (PDF)

 

 

 

Applying Products Liability Law to Facebook’s Platform and Algorithms: Addiction, Radicalization, and Real-World Harm

 

Facebook has become central to the lives of millions of Americans. As of 2021, 69% of U.S. adults use Facebook. Among those U.S. adults who use Facebook, roughly 70% visit Facebook at least once a day. Moreover, as of 2020, 36% of U.S. adults receive their news through Facebook. That means roughly 60 million U.S. adults receive their news through Facebook each day. Facebook’s impact on American society cannot be overstated when viewed through such a lens. Thus, it is important to ensure Facebook responsibly designs its products: its platform and its algorithms.

Grant Shea

J.D. Candidate 2022, University of Richmond School of Law

 

Copyright Takes to the Streets: Protecting Graffiti Under the Visual Artists Rights Act

Copyright Takes to the Streets: Protecting Graffiti Under the Visual Artists Rights Act

Read Full Article (PDF)

 

 

 

Copyright Takes to the Streets: Protecting Graffiti Under the Visual Artists Rights Act

Artists who choose the streets as their canvas—whether to beautify neighborhoods, spark political protest, or merely mark their territory—are faced with uncertainties when it comes to questions of copyright protection for their work. Prior to Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., the rights granted to street artists had generally been uncharted territory. However, a verdict that pitted the rights of street artists against the rights of property owners finally gave street art the credibility many felt it long deserved. In Castillo, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recognized graffiti as a work of visual art, thus providing it copyright protection under the Visual Artists Rights Act (“VARA”) of 1990. This decision reflected a broad change in the perception of unconventional art like graffiti, and it demonstrated the federal courts’ intent on catching up with that change.

Michaela S. Morrissey 

J.D. Candidate 2022, University of Richmond School of Law

 

Confronting the Local Land Checkerboard

Confronting the Local Land Checkerboard

Read Full Article (PDF)

 

 

 

Confronting the Local Land Checkerboard

Fractured public land is hidden in plain sight. In communities across the country, a patchwork assortment of local governments share splintered ownership over surplus public properties, which can be found scattered in residential neighborhoods and alongside highways, in the shadows of development projects and in the scars of urban renewal. The ripple effect of this fragmentation extends across the spectrum of local governance. It creates needless costs and bureaucratic headaches at a time of acute fiscal distress for cities and counties. It contributes to an inequitable imbalance of local power between formal and informal landowners in a community. And curiously, the operative legal regime enables the problem while simultaneously muddying pragmatic ways to confront it. This Article seeks to shed light upon the local land checkerboard— and in doing so, the cluttered and opaque world of local government law that it inhabits

Daniel B. Rosenbaum

Visiting Assistant Professor, University of Detroit Mercy School of Law

 

Unservice: Reconceptualizing the Utility Duty to Serve in Light of Climate Change

Unservice: Reconceptualizing the Utility Duty to Serve in Light of Climate Change

Read Full Article (PDF)

 

 

 

Unservice: Reconceptualizing the Utility Duty to Serve in Light of Climate Change

Many facets of utility monopoly regulation are approaching a minimum of eight decades as part of our legal landscape. A bedrock principle of state utility regulation is the duty to serve, which demands that utilities provide nondiscriminatory service to all those within their geographic territory for the specific service for which they have been granted a monopoly. Within its exclusive territory, a utility is required “to serve all present and reasonably to be anticipated future users.” Each state has adopted some form of this for its regulated monopolies, although formulations differ. This Article argues that in light of climate change impacts, the duty to serve must change.

Heather Payne

Associate Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law