KUNKLE, DBA R. J. RESTORATION CO.

v.

EGGLESTON

Citator

Cited By (24 total)

• Shriner v. State, 386 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 1980)
  …84 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). . TT 641. . TT 651, 655. .TT 636. . The facts surrounding this episode will be fully explored later in this opinion. . United States v. Charlton, 565 F. 2d 86, 89 (6th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1070, 98 S.Ct. 1253, 55 L.Ed.2d 773 (1978). . Id. . We also concur with the Circuit Court’s footnote # 2 to the above statement, 476 F. 2d at 733: We certainly do not intimate approval of any practice by which a suspect’s express desire to remain sile…
• Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp., 714 F.2d 1240 (3d Cir. 1983)
  …result we cannot condone. See Atari, Inc. v. North American Philips Consumer Electronics Corp., 672 F. 2d at 620; cf. Helene Curtis Industries, Inc. v. Church & Dwight Co., 560 F. 2d 1325, 1333 (7th Cir.1977) (trademark infringement), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1070, 98 S.Ct. 1252, 55 L.Ed.2d 772 (1978). The size of the infringer should not be determinative of the copyright holder’s ability to get prompt judicial redress. E. Additional Issues Franklin has raised a number of issues concerning Apple’s complian…
• Atari, Inc. v. N. Am. Philips Consumer Elecs. Corp., 672 F.2d 607 (7th Cir. 1982)
  …ship is the profits it would lose if enjoined from marketing K. C. Munchkin. This argument, however, “merits little equitable consideration.” Helene Curtis Industries v. Church & Dwight Co., Inc., 560 F. 2d 1325, 1333 (7th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1070, 98 S.Ct. 1252, 55 L.Ed.2d 772 (1978). “Advantages built upon a deliberately plagiarized make-up do not seem to us to give the borrower any standing to complain that his vested interests will be disturbed.” My-T Fine Corp. v. Samuels, 69 F. 2d 76, 7…