it's [financially] brutal out there

Olivia Rodrigo was right when she said, "It's brutal out there." Though she was talking about her personal life, today we're diving into some of the harsh, no bars copyright and trademark disputes massive corporations are entrapped in currently.

Trademark Wars

In this article , there is a trade war referenced between Walmart and Kanye West's "Yeezy" brand. Walmart is selling a shoe that is drastically similar to Yeezy's Foam Runner Shoe. Yeezy, LLC is suing Walmart for trademark infringement, claiming that the selling of this cheaper shoe devalues the brand of the original shoe. The Yeezy brand and Kanye West also claim that the logo of Walmart is too similar to the the LLC's logo. From a legal standpoint I can see arguments for both sides of this battle. For example, the marketing of the knockoff shoe without any sort of written or obvious distinction between the Walmart brand and the Yeezy brand makes it seem that Walmart was selling these shoes with the intent to be misleading and deceptive to consumers. This also puts Walmart in direct competition with Yeezy for the same thing. However, Yeezy is arguing that the Walmart logo is too similar to West's logo. This isn't as valid for the LLC to complain about, and in fact Walmart would have grounds to sue Yeezy for this because Walmart started using this particular logo in 2007 and West's brand was non-existent until 2009. Since Walmart used the logo before the creation of the Yeezy brand, it has a greater claim to copyright infringement since it was the first to develop and use it. The only issue is that Yeezy has an official copyright on its version of the logo, but it seems that since Walmart was first to use it, Yeezy would lose a lawsuit if basing it on that alone.

Cloudy Copyrights

In this article it is noted that French competition fined Google for 500 million euros, or $593 million for failure to negotiate fair deals with news publishers for the use of their content. According to the France Competition Authority, Google breached an April 2020 contract stating they would negotiate "in good faith" licensing deals. There are a couple of things that Google has done that the French government doesn't agree with, specifically with granting "neighboring rights," but the issue at first glance is that because of the vague nature of the phrase, "in good faith," the French may not have a case. According to a Google spokesperson, Google has acted "in good faith" throughout the entire process. The point of discrepancy is, what exactly is "in good faith?" If there aren't any specific terms to reference when discussing that, there is no legal right for the France Competition Authority to stand on in fining Google because "in good faith" is up to legal and literal interpretation.