| |
FindLaw's Writ - Julie Hilden |
 | | Hilden argues that the hostility is hypocritical in light of the way similar celebrity speech has been treated, and that it is based on a fallacy: that one must have either personal experience, or professional expertise, before one ought to speak on a particular topic. |
 | | Hilden explains why the Court, in an opinion penned by Justice Souter, unanimously rejected the contention that to prove a "fair use" defense, a defendant must show there is no likelihood that his use of a trademark will cause confusion on the part of consumers or other. |
 | | Hilden explains why the judge's ruling was a correct interpretation of the law, but argues that the law relevant to this issue should be changed, to make accusers' psychiatric history admissible when their testimony is as crucial as it is here. |
| writ.news.findlaw.com /hilden (8411 words) |