Question

1. CVS argues the goods were not grey market goods because they were shown to be actual Davidoff products, and not knock-offs of Davidoff’s products. How did the court respond to that assertion by CVS?
2. CVS also argued that unless Davidoff could show that removal of the UPC label adulterated the product, they could not get an injunction. What was the court’s response to that argument?
3. One issue not addressed by the court is the money that Davidoff loses by having its product sold into the U.S. from the black market by unauthorized sellers. Do you think that factored into the courts injunction?


$1.99
Sales0
Views23
Comments0
  • CreatedSeptember 23, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question
5000