Posts in Trademark

While engaging in a manner most likely to lead to success is critical for any company, it is even more important for toy entrepreneurs for a variety of reasons. Unfortunately, all too frequently costly mistakes are made. Here are five mistakes that I see toy companies make far too often… One of the ultimate ironies is that many toy companies spend most of the time coming up with the perfect name for their company but then don’t take the necessary steps to secure that name. Usually, companies either fail to run a trademark search or wait too long to file the trademark. The best time to discover a trademark issue for your name of choice is at the outset because any conflict can easily be resolved by picking a new name; and trust me while that may not seem desirable in the long run it will save you a lot of time and money.

The idea of brand value is evolving. Trademark lawyers must be concerned with everything that contributes to the protection of a brand, not just its trademarks. Protecting a brand now includes a number of issues that were simply not relevant to the role twenty years ago, such as: trademarks in domain names; the use of trademarks online; trademarks used in social media handles; and trademarks being mentioned in general online commentary.

Kylie Minogue reports victory in a trademark opposition filed against Kylie Jenner, but the electronic records of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are cause for confusion. Also, the estate of Dr. Seuss supports its copyright infringement claims against a New York City playwright and all 12 districts of the Federal Reserve System seek invalidation of two patents on electronic fraud-proof payment systems, plus Netflix, Beyoncé and our weekly updates on what is happening on Capitol Hill and on Wall Street.

On Wednesday, February 1st, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (N.D. Tex.) entered a case verdict which orders virtual reality developer Oculus VR to pay $500 million to Rockville, MD-based interactive computing firm ZeniMax Media Inc. The verdict is the latest activity in a case involving allegations of copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation levied against Oculus, now a subsidiary of social media giant Facebook Inc. (NASDAQ:FB) of Menlo Park, CA.

On December 6th, 2016, the USPTO registered U.S. Trademark Registration No. 5095619, which protects the use of the standard character mark “PERFECT SEASON” in commerce. One week later on December 13th, the USPTO registered U.S. Trademark Registration No. 5100521, which protects the use of the standard character mark “19-0” in commerce… And trademarks only exist so long as they remain in use, so to keep the 19-0 registration the Patriots will have to use it in commerce or risk it going abandoned. So it will be interesting to see how the Patriots continue to use 19-0, or if they continue to use 19-0.

In my previous article: Challenging Aspects of the Legal Protection of Non-Traditional Trademarks: Shape Trademarks, I mentioned that man has five senses and, accordingly, can perceive information, including trademarks, not only by sight. The diversity of human sensations cannot be reproduced by graphics alone. This is what makes the registration and protection of such trademarks, which can be also perceived by other senses, so interesting, unique and at the same time problematic.

This week, a patent battle between two American tech giants expands its scope to China, patents covering a well-known multiple sclerosis treatment were invalidated in U.S. district court and Trumpcare emerges as a possible trademarked moniker for the next incarnation of the country’s healthcare system, Disney files a patent application on evaluating human emotions while on amusement park rides, Ajit Pai holds his first open FCC meeting as Chairman and not surprisingly says he wants to reduce regulations, plus a whole lot more.

When President Donald Trump’s campaign for re-election starts gearing up for the 2020 election season, you will know it when you hear him say that he wants to “keep America great.” Trump has already filed two trademark applications to protect the use of this next incarnation of the political slogan which helped to put him in the White House… The story surrounding Trump’s decision to file the trademarks is a perfect example of his brusque style. An interview with Trump published by The Washington Post, also dated January 18th, describes how the then-President-elect stopped his interview briefly after saying that slogan to the interviewer to ask a lawyer to trademark that slogan. The Post’s coverage clearly states that he immediately wanted to trademark two versions of “Keep America Great,” one with an exclamation point and one without.

On the menu this week for Other Barks & Bites, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a case challenging the Lanham Act’s disparagement provision, a six-figure damages verdict goes in favor of former USPTO Deputy Director Russell Slifer, a TTAB petition is filed to challenge the trademark application for an NFL franchise currently in the relocation process, an announcement by a Japanese academic-industry research project that claims to have doubled the effectiveness of solar cell panel conversion rates, the FTC takes action against a pharmaceutical company and much more.

In his opening remarks, Ross noted that he had been a consumer of various forms of data published by various agencies within the commerce department. He seemed attuned to the importance of data collection and dissemination, noting that 40 percent of publicly disseminated data from all federal agencies comes from the Department of Commerce. With experience operating businesses in 23 countries, Ross was confident in his ability to negotiate foreign trade agreements to the benefit of the American economy. “I know directly what’s good and what’s not good about trade policies in other countries,” Ross said. He added that he was neither pro-trade nor anti-trade but rather pro-sensible trade, which he defined as being supportive of trade deals which were good for American workers and businesses.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Southern District Court of New York in Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. My Other Bag, Inc., a trademark infringement case in which summary judgment was granted to defendant My Other Bag (MOB) on the basis that their product – a cheap canvas bag that features a cartoonish depiction of plaintiff Louis Vuitton’s (LV) marks – satisfies the elements of a parody defense and is therefore unlikely to cause confusion despite surface-level similarities…. The outcome of the case in favor of the defendant represents a big win for defendants making use of the parody defense to target a famous trademark-holder.

This week’s news headlines include nomination hearings for the potential incoming U.S. Commerce Secretary, the Supreme Court’s granting certiorari for an important case in biologics, a patent infringement suit targeting the NFL, the expiration of copyright protecting the works of a very influential science fiction author from the early 20th century, and another sports figure — this time UFC Lightweight Champion Conor McGregor — filing trademark applications.

The Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument in Lee v. Tam for January 18… The genesis of the case is a Portland, Oregon all-Asian-American band called The Slants, founded by petitioner Simon Shiao Tam. An application for trademark was made and the USPTO said “NO” on the basis that “The Slants” is a highly disparaging term and therefore must be denied registration under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act… The cultural and societal value of the free flow of speech trumps government regulation. The Supreme Court should uphold the Constitution and confirm the importance of robust political debate, cultural discourse, and the right to use ANY words as part of a personal identity.

For the year patent infringement cases dropped by 22 percent from the previous year, from 5,823 cases in 2015 down to 4,520 cases in 2016. 2016 actually saw the lowest number of patent infringement lawsuits filed since 2011, when 3,578 cases were filed. There was no month during 2016 where more than 460 patent suits were filed; both 2014 and 2015 had at least one month where more than 650 patent suits were filed in district court.

On August 8, 2016, plaintiff became aware of defendant’s unauthorized use of the Marilyn Monroe marks and likeness and sent a cease and desist letter. Defendant continued with their allegedly unauthorized activities, leading to the filing of the complaint that starts this legal dispute. It is worth noting, however, that the defendant did not use the name Marilyn Monroe in any of its marketing, packaging, or other branding. Any association to Marilyn Monroe is based solely on defendant’s use of her visual likeness.