Category - "Trademark"

Overview of the 2025 USPTO Trademark Fee Changes Starting January 18, 2025

Share

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced significant changes to trademark filing fees, which will take effect on January 18, 2025. The changes impact both new applications and post-registration maintenance fees, as well as several specific fees related to petitions, protests, and statements of use, and includes new fees related to insufficient application information and failure to prepare an application using the USPTO’s pre-approved identifications from its Trademark Identification Manual.

Key Changes to Application Fees

Retirement of TEAS Plus Applications

The USPTO previously had two different trademark filing “tiers” —TEAS Plus and TEAS Standard—whereby TEAS Plus had a $250 per class filing fee, and TEAS Standard had a $350 per class filing fee. The Office has now consolidated their forms into one “base application” with a fee of $350 per class filed under Sections 1 and 44 of the Trademark Act (applications filed based on use, intent to use, foreign applications, and foreign registrations). Additional fees will be added based on the complexity or completeness of the application, as discussed below.

Continue reading “Overview of the 2025 USPTO Trademark Fee Changes Starting January 18, 2025”

Hoisting Scammers with Their Own Petard with the UDRP

Share

With the widespread availability of domain registration and hosting services and the advent of low-cost generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) software, the creation of fraudulent websites has never been easier—or more convincing. With little more effort than a few prompts of an AI program, scammers are able to quickly set up seemingly legitimate websites with text, images, and even video that can look and sound like the real thing. Online consumers, even those savvy enough to recognize your typical email phishing scam, may be fooled by professional-looking websites imitating existing businesses and organizations for less than savory reasons.

For brand owners, the consequences of these imitators can be myriad, including a loss of brand control, irate consumers looking for someone to blame, and ultimately a hit to your bottom line. Indeed, according to the FBI’s 2023 Internet Crime Report, Americans reported over $7.5 billion in losses stemming from intellectual property-related cybercrimes in 2023, up from 2022. Adding to this problem is the fact enforcing your rights against scammer sites can be costly and time-consuming. Scammers themselves are often anonymous and unsurprisingly unlikely to make themselves readily identifiable or easy to track down. Domain registrars and web hosts may require brand owners to navigate byzantine reporting channels in order to flag problematic conduct. And the resources required attempting to litigate every offending domain in court can make it an untenable option for many.

Continue reading “Hoisting Scammers with Their Own Petard with the UDRP”

Make your Company a Hard Target for Job Scams

Share

Your company’s talent is its lifeblood. Job postings for qualified individuals and other recruitment activities are vital to its operations. What happens, then, when scammers disrupt your business by conducting phishing schemes to trick individuals into applying for nonexistent jobs you did not post with the objective of stealing their personally identifiable information? In the age of remote work and virtual hiring, the impersonation of companies in job recruitment scams has become increasingly prevalent.

It can be difficult for job seekers to recognize a recruitment outreach as a scam, particularly when they’re highly interested in the opportunity. Therefore, it is incumbent upon companies to take steps to mitigate or stop the potential for harm. Leveraging company intellectual property is crucial to combating such schemes and to protecting both job seekers and the company’s good name.

Continue reading “Make your Company a Hard Target for Job Scams”

From Concept to Commerce: The Art of Trademark Specimens of Use

Share

In the world of trademarks, specimens of use (or proof of use) play a crucial role in obtaining and maintaining a trademark registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). In this blog post, we’ll delve into the types of specimens that are accepted by the USPTO (hint: they’re not alien artifacts!), the specific requirements for each type of specimen, and some practical tips to help you navigate the selection process. So, grab your magnifying glass (figuratively, of course) and let’s examine the basics of specimens of use!

What is a Specimen of Use, and When Do I Need One?

Before the USPTO grants registration of your trademark, it wants to see tangible evidence that your mark is actually being used in U.S. commerce. That’s where specimens of use come in. A “specimen of use” simply means evidence of how a trademark is used. To meet the USPTO requirements, the evidence must show actual commercial use of the mark in the U.S. in connection with the goods and/or services claimed in the application or registration. There are three circumstances under which trademark owners are required to submit specimens proving use of their marks: (1) to obtain registration; (2) to maintain registration; and (3) to respond to a post-registration audit from the USPTO. Let’s investigate these scenarios further.

Continue reading “From Concept to Commerce: The Art of Trademark Specimens of Use”

Trademark Toolkit for In-House Counsel: “Can We Trademark This?”

Share

Most in-house counsel periodically encounter branding questions — and the business team wants answers … yesterday! To give you a head start, this article discusses key branding questions that companies frequently face and provides a roadmap for addressing them.

Can I trademark/patent/copyright this name? Let’s find out!

For starters, let’s clarify. This common intellectual property inquiry relates to trademarks — words and symbols that identify your company’s products and services, distinguishing them from competitors’ products and services. In contrast, patents protect inventions, and copyright law protects original works of authorship like photos, books and musical compositions.

Continue reading “Trademark Toolkit for In-House Counsel: “Can We Trademark This?””

New Frontier: Ten Tips for Navigating Brand Protection in the Metaverse

Share

Advances in technology have taken the world by storm in recent years and brand owners must adapt to new forms of expression and brand awareness. Enter the metaverse: an online virtual world where users can interact with each other and digital objects including Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs). NFTs are unique digital assets depicting works of art, photographs, text, and/or other digital content, minted using blockchain to identify an interest in a certain asset. Many companies are using NFTs to leverage their brands, which in turn create new revenue channels.

Continue reading “New Frontier: Ten Tips for Navigating Brand Protection in the Metaverse”

Not So Punny After All? Parody After the Supreme Court’s Jack Daniel’s Decision

Share

Earlier this year, one of my colleagues posted a guide to parody under U.S. trademark law for those brands hoping to navigate trademark parody without crossing into trademark infringement or dilution. But as we all know, the legal landscape can change in just a few months, especially when the Supreme Court gets involved. In this post, we explore the Court’s recent decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC and discuss what, if anything, it changes for brands navigating that parody tightrope. (Spoiler Alert: Not that Much.)

For those unfamiliar, VIP Products makes a “Bad Spaniels” poop-themed dog toy designed to look like a bottle of . . . you guessed it . . . Jack Daniel’s whiskey. Unamused, Jack Daniel’s demanded VIP Products stop selling the toys, and the parties became embroiled in years-long litigation with Jack Daniel’s claiming infringement and dilution of its trademarks and VIP Products crying parody. While Jack Daniel’s was victorious in the district court, the joke seemed to have landed on more humorous ears in the Ninth Circuit, and the Court held that the “Bad Spaniels” toy was an expressive work warranting heighted First Amendment protection from trademark infringement claims. On the dilution issue, the Court found that the humorous nature of the product rendered the toys “non-commercial” and thus exempt from the dilution claim.

Continue reading “Not So Punny After All? Parody After the Supreme Court’s Jack Daniel’s Decision”

Protecting Your Certification Marks with Certainty

Share

A certification mark is an important business tool.  Displaying a certification mark on a product or on marketing materials indicates that a company’s offerings meet certain standards.  Consumers often look for items that have been tested and found to meet their desired standards, so use of a certification mark can provide businesses with a competitive advantage.

A certification mark doesn’t serve the same function as a source-indicating brand.  Instead of helping companies distinguish their offerings from others, certification marks show consumers that products or services have been “certified” as to a particular quality or characteristic.  For example, a certification mark may appear on food that originated in a specific geographic region or on a household product that contains certain materials.  A certification mark may also be used in connection with services that are provided by members of a union or other organization.

Continue reading “Protecting Your Certification Marks with Certainty”

Singapore – Where Global IP Professionals Came Together

Share

I just recently left Singapore, where the lush gardens and iconic city skyline served as the backdrop for The International Trademark Association’s (INTA) 145th Annual Meeting. This was the second time that INTA’s Annual Meeting was hosted in Asia and the first time in Southeast Asia. While the location was originally planned for the 2020 Meeting, as with most things in life, the pandemic put that on hold. Despite the immense humidity, 8,000 influential brand and IP professionals from around the world came to the Lion City to share their thoughts regarding future considerations for brand owners and the business of innovation.

One consistent theme throughout the conference was that new challenges are facing brand owners today. Several factors appear to be changing the landscape for brands across various industries including, without limitation, the facts that: (1) counterfeiting is on the rise; (2) the value of intangible business assets is increasing; (3) new countries are becoming IP powerhouses due to global trade; and (4) emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), NFTs and the metaverse, are changing the way in which consumers interact with the world around them.

Continue reading “Singapore – Where Global IP Professionals Came Together”

Why 3D Printing Doesn’t Have to be a Pandora’s Box for IP Rights

Share

Personal 3D printing has seen leaps in advancement in recent years, allowing users to render increasingly sophisticated creations from the comfort of their own home. These creations can include anything from gaming miniatures to medical devices, often for pennies on the dollar. With these advancements, however, comes a growing need for intellectual property owners to actively protect their property through trademark and copyright registrations.

To provide a general overview, modern 3D printing typically begins with the creation of an “STL,” a computer file containing information on the model to be printed. This model can be sculpted via computer aided design (“CAD”) software. 3D scanners, which can provide three-dimensional scans of existing physical objects, can also provide a foundation for shaping realistically sculpted CAD models. For example, a sculptor looking to print a miniature of their favorite sports car may scan a toy model to work on in CAD rather than recreate every detail from scratch. The CAD model is then exported into an STL file. “Slicing” software then converts the STL into instructions for the 3D printer to create the actual model. This is done by stacking thousands of thin layers of the printing material, often plastic or resin, atop each other until the particular component is complete—much like how a stack of paper can form a cube, but molded into virtually any shape imaginable. Users can then easily share these STLs online, including through a variety of popular sites that make such files available for free or for purchase.

Continue reading “Why 3D Printing Doesn’t Have to be a Pandora’s Box for IP Rights”