Oops! Now What? Corrective Assignments and Fixing Inadvertent Chain of Title Errors

Share

We’ve all been there.  Maybe we find it in reviewing the chain of title for trademarks during due diligence.  Maybe it’s something that another company filed that has nothing to do with us.  Or maybe someone on your team made a typo (yup, no one is perfect!).  But, however it happened, it’s there, in the USPTO records:  an assignment inadvertently recorded against a registration that was not actually part of the assignment; a security interest recorded against the wrong application number; or a name change was erroneously recorded as a merger.  Regardless of why or what, the bottom line is the same:  there is an error in the chain of title for the application or registration.  Oops!  Now what?  How do we get that error fixed and removed from the USPTO trademark records?

Continue reading

Celebrating One Year of TCAM Today!

Share

In February 2020, Faegre Baker Daniels and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP combined to form one of the nation’s 50 largest law firms.  Soon after the combination, Faegre Drinker shifted to a virtual work environment to protect our clients, colleagues and loved ones during the global COVID-19 pandemic.  We nevertheless remained committed to the success of our clients in a challenging year, and focused on serving clients with our new firm’s combined capabilities.

This month marks not only the first year of Faegre Drinker, but also the inaugural year of TCAM Today – Faegre Drinker’s blog covering all things trademark, copyright, advertising and media.  In 2020, Faegre Drinker’s team of more than 30 T-CAM professionals shared their insight on topics ranging from social media influencers to trademark trolls.

Continue reading

Important New Trademark and Copyright Laws Appear in Stimulus Package

Share

In a year too often filled with unforeseen developments of every kind, a final surprise for many who were not paying close attention has emerged from December’s marathon stimulus and budget negotiations.  This week, Congress included a trio of notable and hotly debated intellectual property measures in its multi-trillion-dollar spending and relief package.  These bills, if signed into law as expected, could fundamentally alter the manner in which intellectual property owners protect and enforce their rights.

Continue reading

USPTO Warns of New Email Scam

Share

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently released a warning regarding email scams targeting owners of trademark applications and registrations.  Unfortunately, misleading notices and solicitations are nothing new for those experienced with filing applications with the USPTO.  Because filings with the USPTO are public, private companies are able to gather the contact information of trademark applicants and registrants.  They use this information to send misleading letters and emails asking brand owners for substantial fees in order to renew or maintain trademark applications and registrations.  These companies often go by names that sound like official government agencies, which increases the confusion and the likelihood that brand owners will be duped into responding to the solicitations.

Continue reading

Sound Marks

Share

What do you think of when you hear this lion’s roar

How about these five notes?

Or these words?

Trademarks are not limited to words and designs, but can include “sensory” marks such as colors, smells and sounds. All of the above sounds are examples of trademarks: the lion’s roar is a registered trademark owned by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Lion Corp. for motion pictures and entertainment services, and heard at the start of MGM movies; the five notes are a registered trademark owned by Intel Corporation for computer hardware and operating system software; and the spoken words “You’ve Got Mail” is AOL’s registered trademark for providing access to a computer network.

Continue reading

Tips for Transferring Trademarks in Light of COVID-19

Share

In 2017, we wrote about some of our favorite strategies for updating the ownership of global trademark portfolios. As we continue to support our clients during the pandemic, we’ve developed new strategies for documenting trademark ownership updates outside the U.S. Here, we share a few of these tips.

In this post, we focus on transferring — or assigning — trademark portfolios involving marks in multiple countries. Generally, the transfer of trademark rights from one entity to another must be documented with the trademark office in every country where the assignor owned marks. The requirements for recording a transfer vary by country but often involve submitting newly executed trademark assignment agreements, powers of attorney and other documents. These documents may also need to be notarized or legalized before submission.

Continue reading

The Future of the “Generic.com” Trademark

Share

The basic premise that a generic term is un-registrable is, at first glance, uncontroversial. If a key purpose of a trademark is to identify a particular source of goods or services, then it stands to reason that one cannot obtain a trademark registration for the name of that very category of goods or services. For example, it’s unlikely one could register the mark “Books” for a bookstore, or “Groceries” for a supermarket—doing so would effectively grant the owner a monopoly on the use of those very terms. But what if those ostensibly generic terms were part of a website domain?

Continue reading

Updates Regarding COVID-19 Impacts on Trademark Operations at the USPTO

Share

Updated May 29, 2020
[Kelly Horein]

On May 27, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced updated measures granting relief for trademark owners impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The deadline extensions that the USPTO announced through previous notices will expire on May 31.

The USPTO will now provide relief on a case-by-case basis for mark owners who have missed certain deadlines as a result of the pandemic. In particular, if mark owners have failed to timely submit responses or fees in connection with Office Actions, or failed to timely meet statutory deadlines, they may file a petition to revive an application or a petition to the director, as appropriate. The petition should explain that the delay in filing or payment was due to the pandemic. For now, if such a statement is included, the USPTO will waive the fees associated with filing the petition.

If the pandemic has interfered with filings with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, mark owners may make a request or motion, as appropriate, for an extension or reopening of time.

We’ll continue to post updates here. If you have missed a deadline and wish to better understand the steps you can take to continue protecting your trademark rights, please feel free to contact the Faegre Drinker trademark team.

Continue reading

BIG TRUSS: A Playoff Story of Opportunism at the Trademark Office

Share

As a trademark attorney, devoted Baltimore Ravens fan, and furtive TMZ reader, I couldn’t help but notice this story authored recently, describing how Mark Ingram’s aspirations of registering BIG TRUSS in the US Trademark Office are (potentially) being blocked by someone who applied to register the phrase first.

For those uninitiated, “Big Truss” is the pet name for Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson, coined by Mark Ingram, Ravens running back.  Mark and Lamar’s well-documented bromance is one for the ages.  The phrase first captured public attention when Mark Ingram uttered it in a November 21, 2019 press conference, although the origins of “Truss” appear to date back much further, to a 1991 album by Public Enemy, as this fascinating Baltimore Sun article explains.  The BIG TRUSS application blocking Mr. Ingram’s attempts to register the phrase was filed on December 13, 2019 – 3 weeks after the aforementioned press conference, and candidly, a lifetime in the trademark world.

Continue reading

Be on the Lookout for Potentially Misleading Trademark Solicitations

Share

If you own a U.S. trademark registration, chances are you’ve received official-looking solicitations offering to handle trademark services on your behalf in return for a fee. Read these notices carefully – more often than not, they don’t come from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Instead, they’re sent by private companies that have obtained your contact information from the publicly accessible USPTO trademark database. Worse than that, these notices may ask trademark owners to pay thousands of dollars in fees in exchange for services that aren’t even timely or necessary.

Continue reading