Category - "Trademark"

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”

Laugh It Off: A Guide to Parody Under U.S. Trademark Law

Share

Imagine poking fun at a famous brand or logo and getting away with it. In the United States, it’s not only possible, but can also be a recognized form of artistic expression known as trademark parody. Trademark parodies are a form of humorous or satirical commentary that uses a well-known trademark in a playful or critical manner. But typically, the target of that humor or satire is not amused.  Companies invest a lot of time, effort, creativity, and resources into building their brands and creating positive associations with their trademarks. Thus, if a famous brand owner believes that the use of its trademark by a third party may damage its reputation, the company could take legal action against a parody mark to protect its image and trademark rights.

In this post, we will explore what constitutes a trademark parody and when it crosses the line of trademark infringement or dilution (which occurs when the recognition of a distinctive trademark is weakened due to unauthorized use by others).

Continue reading “Laugh It Off: A Guide to Parody Under U.S. Trademark Law”

The Prior Registration Puzzle: Overcoming Registration Refusals Based on Intervening Third-Party Marks

Share

Many trademark attorneys practicing for an appreciable length of time have encountered the following scenario:

  1. Your client owns a registration for a mark (the “Anchor Registration”);
  2. Your client refrained from opposing registration of a similar third-party mark (the “Intervening Mark”) because it saw a low likelihood of confusion;
  3. Your client’s subsequently filed applications in the Trademark Office for the mark depicted in the Anchor Registration (or a virtually identical mark) were refused registration based on the Intervening Mark; and
  4. Attempts to obtain consent from, or coexist with, the Intervening Mark owner were unsuccessful for some reason.

Continue reading “The Prior Registration Puzzle: Overcoming Registration Refusals Based on Intervening Third-Party Marks”

Trademark Strategy as a Tool to Combat Cybercrime

Share

It is an all-too-common occurrence: The phone rings and a panicked client on the other end of the line has been impacted by an online fraud. Fraud on the internet is carried out daily, with new and inventive methods of attack being put into practice to mask and conceal the crime at hand until it is “too late.” While we have all learned to identify and avoid certain suspicious behaviors, bad actors continue to develop new and inventive ways to procure sensitive data, receive payments under fraudulent pretexts and otherwise perpetrate crimes with the benefit of the relative anonymity and obscurity that is afforded by the internet.

According to the 2021 report from the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), the IC3 alone received more than 2.75 million complaints and reported losses of $18.7 billion from 2017 to 2021. See Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internet Crime Report 2021. Broader studies seeking to understand the global impact of such activities suggest total losses actually range in the hundreds of billions per year, depending on the study. Regardless of the source, one thing is clear: The cost of frauds resulting from spoofed websites designed to collect sensitive consumer data, email account compromise designed to extract payments from unwitting customers by sending apparently legitimate requests for invoice payment, and even more involved frauds are impacting clients by costing them real dollars, damaging their reputation and customer relationships, and otherwise putting a strain on their ability to conduct business.

Continue reading “Trademark Strategy as a Tool to Combat Cybercrime”

College T-shirts and Trademarks – Ornamental or Protectable?

Share

As college freshmen head to campus for the start of classes, there is one vital campus bookstore purchase before classes begin: a T-shirt bearing the college’s logo. This purchase is not only a rite of passage for freshmen; it also touches on an important concept in trademark law: ornamental use of trademarks on T-shirts.

What is ornamental use?

Under sections 1, 2, and 45 of the Trademark Act, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) can refuse registration of a trademark on the ground that the applied-for matter is decorative and therefore does not function as a mark because it is merely ornamentation. In re Peace Love World Live, LLC, 127 U.S.P.Q.2d 1400 (TTAB 2018). Ornamental matter can include words, designs, slogans, or trade dress.

Continue reading “College T-shirts and Trademarks – Ornamental or Protectable?”