Posts Tagged: "incontestable status"

Incontestable Status: What it is and why trademark owners want it

Incontestable status does not make the trademark immune from all possible challenges, however, the most problematic challenges from a trademark owner’s perspective are gone… “To me, incontestable status is important as it removes the ability for the trademark to be cancelled by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board for descriptiveness,” said attorney Mark Malek of Widerman Malek.

Costco Attempts to Defend Sale of Counterfeit TIFFANY Diamonds

This should have been an open and shut case. But then Costco decided to aggressively defend what seems indefensible. Costco is basing its defense on the belief that the “[t]he word Tiffany is a generic term for ring settings comprising multiple slender prongs extending upward from a base to hold a single gemstone.” See opening paragraph of the Costco Answer and Counterclaim. In support of this position Costco submitted dictionary definitions, pages from Wedding Planning for Dummies discussing rings, online articles (such as from About.com), online sales pages (such as from Amazon.com) and other materials.

Trademark Process: Obtaining and Keeping a U.S. Trademark

When seeking to obtain a United States trademark there are a number of different steps to the process, and even after the trademark has issued there are several key events that must be planned for in order to continue to maintain the trademark in good standing. Before moving forward to elaborate it is vitally important to understand that once you file a trademark application it will be necessary to promptly respond to any inquiries made or issues raised by the Trademark Office, which will come from a trademark examining attorney. Likewise, to preserve the trademark in good standing there will be additional steps that you must take after the trademark has issued.

A Patent Legislative Agenda, What Congress Should Do in 2011

Realistically, I understand full well that it is unlikely that Congress will bother themselves with reform efforts that are sensible, at least at the moment. It is also unlikely that innovators will be adequately represented in any reform efforts once they do arise. It seems that the power structure in Washington, D.C. believes that the term “innovator” and “big business” are synonymous, which surely they are not. It is also unlikely the Senate will move beyond the legislation Senator Leahy wants so badly but can’t seem to move. Thus, if we really want sensible reform that actually raises up the Patent Office and guarantees the value of patents for innovators we need to be ever vigilant.