David is a Partner at Keats McFarland & Wilson LLP, where he has practiced since its inception in the summer of 1999.  Since 1995, David has focused his practice entirely on intellectual property law. This practice involves a balance of Internet law and traditional intellectual property law.

David's practice includes all types of transactions and litigation concerning copyright, trademark, and licensing. David has litigated copyright infringement, trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, anticounterfeiting, cybersquatting (including through ICANN’s domain name dispute resolution policy), reverse confusion, dilution, unfair competition, right of publicity, and "idea submission" cases throughout the United States. This practice has involved all facets of intellectual property litigation, including seizure orders, preliminary injunction orders, summary judgment motions, contempt orders, appellate, and Supreme Court practice. David's transactional experience has involved assisting his clients with contracts relating to the licensing and acquiring of copyrights and trademarks.

David has handled virtually every type of Internet-related intellectual property issue and has developed Internet monitoring and enforcement programs for some of the world's largest media, entertainment, and technology companies, as well as celebrities.  These programs involve protecting copyrights, trademarks, and other intellectual property rights against a wide variety of infringements on the Internet.  David has handled disputes involving thousands of Internet counterfeiters and other infringers from across the world. David has recovered hundreds of infringing domain names, stopped the distribution of infringing content by hundreds of web sites, and halted the distribution of infringing products by thousands of Internet auction sellers.

David's Internet law practice also involves counseling and transactional services relating to Internet business issues and intellectual property issues raised by the Internet.  David has negotiated and drafted Internet-related contracts and advised clients regarding the implications of contracts to their Internet businesses.

David has assisted his clients by conducting training sessions for customs and law enforcement representatives as well as Internet service providers.  David has also presented seminars regarding Internet litigation and enforcement, and been interviewed for publications and broadcasts on intellectual property issues.

From 2004 – 2008, Los Angeles Magazine named David as a "Super Lawyer” ranking him in the top 2.5 percent of Southern California lawyers age 40 or younger.

Published Decisions:

• M2 Software v. Viacom, Inc., 2007 WL 649733 (9th Cir.);
  
• M2 Software v. M2 Communications, L.L.C., 463 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2006);
  
• M2 Software v. M2 Communications, L.L.C., 2005 WL 2186870 (9th Cir.);
  
• M2 Software v. M2 Communications, LLC, 2003 WL 21949139 (9th Cir.);
  
• Time Warner Entertainment, Co., L.P. v. B.C.P. Toys, Inc., 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 4989 (9th Cir.);
  
• Dees v. Saban Entertainment, Inc. 1997 U.S. App. 34129 (9th Cir.);
  
• Krav Maga Ass’n of America, Inc. v. Yanilov, 464 F.Supp. 2d 981 (C.D. Cal. 2006);
  
• Gucci America, Inc. v. Pieta, 2006 WL 4725707 (C.D. Cal.);
  
• Gucci America, Inc. v. Pieta, 2006 WL 4725706 (C.D. Cal.);
  
• Dudnikov v. MGA Entertainment, Inc., 410 F.Supp.2d 1010 (D. Colo. 2005);
  
• M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Communications L.L.C., 281 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (C.D. Cal. 2003);
  
• M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Communications L.L.C., 217 F.R.D. 499 (C.D. Cal. 2003).

David has assisted his clients by conducting training sessions for customs and law enforcement representatives as well as Internet service providers. David has also presented seminars regarding Internet litigation and enforcement, and been interviewed for publications and broadcasts on intellectual property issues.

Admitted: California; U.S. District Court, Northern, Central, Southern and Eastern Districts of California; U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court.