Tag Archives: Intellectual property law

ILN Today Post

Højesteret har truffet ny afgørelse i sag om sagsomkostninger

Højesteret har den 15. januar 2018 afsagt dom vedrørende sagsomkostninger, hvor sagen drejede sig om, hvorvidt en rekvirent havde krav på hel eller delvis dækning af udgifter til en bankgaranti på 10 mio. kr., der var stillet som sikkerhed i forbindelse med et fogedforbud i 2008.

Read More

Read full article

Tomorrow Is Yesterday: Today’s Cases Boldly Going Where Our Blogs Have Gone Before

Sometimes blogging topics are hard to come by.  It is often difficult because, as a sage once noted in discussing the search for The Ultimate Computer, one wants to do one’s best, but something like creativity “doesn’t work on an assembly line basis. … You can’t simply say, today I will be brilliant,” insightful, informative or even mildly amusing.  But other times topics materialize right before your eyes, as if dropped on your desk by fate or chance, and then they seemingly write themselves, without either assembly lines or much hard work.

Read full article

Can Similar Trademarks Coexist Peacefully?

Suppose that you want to register a trademark that identifies a source of goods or services for your business.  You file a federal trademark application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.  Subsequently, you receive an Office Action from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that initially refuses registration of your mark based on a likelihood of confusion with a similar trademark?  Can you overcome the refusal to obtain a registration from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office?  The answer is often YES!

Read full article

Can Trademarks Violate Free Speech?

Suppose that you want to register a trademark that identifies a source of goods or services for your business.  What if the trademark may be scandalous or disparage a particular group of people?  Should you register your trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office?  Can you obtain a registration from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office?  The answer is YES!

Read full article

Matal v. Tam – Disparaging Trademarks are Registrable

It is well known that the trademark laws of the United States differ substantially from the trademark laws of countries around the world.  The United States Supreme Court recently clarified that ‘offensive’ trademarks are registrable, further differentiating the United States from the majority the world.

Read full article

U.S. Supreme Court Invalidates Statutory Provision against Offensive Trademarks

alice-moore-192521Although U.S. common law trademark rights are gained through use of the mark in commerce (without registration), registration of a trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) provides the owner with additional rights and benefits.  These include nationwide enforcement of the mark against infringers; constructive notice of the registrant’s claim of ownership of the mark; evidentiary presumptions of the validity of the mark, the registrant’s ownership of the mark, and the registrant’s exclusive right to use the mark in commerce on or in connection with the goods or services in the registration; the status of “incontestability” once the mark has used in commerce for five years after registration; and the ability to stop importation of infringing goods into the U.S.

Read full article

Trader Joe’s trying to make Pirate Joe’s “walk the plank” in U.S. trade-mark case

In the ongoing dispute between Michael Hallatt, a Vancouver businessman, and U.S. based retailer Trader Joe’s, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the “Ninth Circuit”) has overruled the 2013 decision of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (the “District Court”) not to hear Trader Joe’s claim against Hallatt for, among other things, trade-mark infringement, dilution, unfair competition and false advertising.

The dispute arose out of Hallatt’s purchase of products from Trader Joe’s stores in the U.S., particularly in the state of Washington, for resale in Canada (there are no Trader Joe’s stores in Canada).  Hallatt has and continues to mark up and re-sell Trader Joe’s products at his store in Vancouver, named Pirate Joe’s.

Read full article

Can a 3-D Work of Artistic Craftsmanship be Protected by a Copyright?

photo-1447758902204-48010b87c24dSuppose that you create a unique three-dimensional display. You find out that your competitor has copied your three-dimensional display. Can you claim that the design of the display is a three-dimensional work of artistic craftsmanship to apply for a copyright registration to enforce against your competitor? The answer may be YES!

Under 17 U.S.C. § 101, “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works” include three-dimensional works of artistic craftsmanship insofar as their form but not their mechanical or utilitarian aspects. The design of a useful article shall be considered a “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural work” only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Howard & Howard welcomes Andrew (Jake) Grove

Royal Oak, Michigan, May 25, 2016:  Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC is pleased to announce that Andrew (Jake) Grove has joined the firm.  He will practice out of the firm’s Royal Oak Office.

Jake Grove, who concentrates his practice in patent, trademark, copyright and trade secrets matters, brings nearly 27 years of experience in intellectual property law, including several assignments as lead counsel in complex IP litigation matters for some of the largest companies in the world. Grove has experience preparing and prosecuting patent and trademark applications with an emphasis on mechanical and electro-mechanical technologies and assists clients in finding cost-effective resolutions to patent troll attacks. One of the premier IP litigators and IP law thought leaders in the area, Grove has a long-term professorship at the University of Detroit Mercy Law School, several published works including a student case book on patent law, and is a regular speaker at a wide variety of conferences.

Read More

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Unfair Competition without U.S. Competition? Yes.

Businesses marketing their products under one mark in the United States and a different mark in other countries may have a new weapon against American competitors.  Previously, it was understood that to stop competing use of a foreign mark in the United States, there must have been use of the foreign mark in the United States as well.  Now, a federal appeals court based in Virginia (the Fourth Circuit) has broadened the ability to stop competitor use of a foreign mark in the United States.   In the case Belmora LL v. Bayer Consumer Care AG, No. 15-1335 (4th Cir. 2016), the court held that section 43 of the Lanham Act does not require prior use of a trademark in the United States before suing for unfair competition in the United States.

The case involved the FLANAX mark used in connection with the sale of naproxen sodium tablets in Mexico, including communities bordering the United States, since 1976.  While the FLANAX mark was well known not only in Mexico but also by Mexican-Americans in the United States, the mark itself was never used on products sold in the United States.  In the United States, the same company (through its corporate affiliate) used the brand ALEVE to sell the same naproxen sodium tablets.  In 2004, a competitor began selling naproxen sodium tablets in the United States under the mark FLANAX, and with similar packaging to that used in Mexico by the competing company.  It suggested in its advertising that it was the same product that had been marketed in Mexico for decades.

Read full article