Event JSON
{
"id": "dee78e84e9d6604431cc80b8f805cfe677871130b182e818fac199b4515efeb7",
"pubkey": "9eefd04d32ab5da8de12d7b83201578ea095a676acf3a692ec1b0b202ae4e16f",
"created_at": 1704817679,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"8b24a10e1dec148c4d185875ed699f9a7a6bf793d0457f32869cff5b76a7b161",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"286fee5b55279c7031bb63cad7b07350f0f827103b452a37cf1364d32af8f941",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"fd04b536ce1a625b419807476a3e3051109c48b15080b3faa3e40a64cfd8a9d0",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.social/users/design_law/statuses/111726931432328749",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub13vj2zrsaas2gcngctp6766vlnfaxhaun6pzh7v5xnnl4ka48k9ss7a9alu Also, I think the wording of the Gorham test confuses a lot of attorneys and judges who do know something about other areas of IP. They may read that holding as setting forth something that looks like the \"substantial similarity\" test in contemporary copyright law or the \"likelihood of confusion test\" in contemporary trademark law. Neither of those require the same high degree of visual similarity.",
"sig": "95b54a62edf81c0e2bf78fbe6768bbffdbeea3348c02501817e67f0afe9210994b8b4e15e9d4b8bc114f430e5e616ee18796a0d1053922dd2fdcefadd616bfdd"
}