Talk:Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Update

This page needs to be updated to reflect the 9th Circuit's decision at 279 F.3d 296 (2002), which affirmed the district court's opinion in part and reversed it in part. The 9th Circuit affirmed the district court's summary judgment as to Welles' use of Playboy's trademarks for headlines, banner ads, and metatags, but reversed and remanded as to the repeated use of "PMOY 81" on her wallpaper. The Circuit Court determined that Welles' nominative use defense failed as to the first prong of the nominative use test as to the wallpaper, finding that her repeated use of PMOY 81 on the wallpaper was "not necessary to describe Welles."

Because the Circuit Court's analysis was the "last word" on the subject as to nominative use in this case, and gives further clarification as to the nominative use test, I would recommend changing this page, listing it as a 9th Circuit opinion and explaining its holding as outlined above (which I'm sure can use even further refinement). Lawstudent10 (talk) 03:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better late than never. I did the above 14 years later. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 03:12, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]