Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Third Circuit has adopted McCarthy’s “ownership” test in determining whether a manufacturer or distributor owns a trademark in the absence of an express agreement between the parties. In Covertech Fabricating, Inc. v. TVM Building Products, Inc. et.al., No. 15-3893 (3d Cir. 2017), the court adopted McCarthy’s test as the formal rule of the circuit, specifically replacing the “first use” test that typically decides trademark ownership disputes. The McCarthy test was first enumerated in Professor Thomas McCarthy’s seminal treatise on trademark law. See, McCarthy on Trademarks & Unfair Competition (4th ed. 2017). The Covertech case may prove to be a “win” for manufacturers as opposed to exclusive distributors when ownership of trademarks is not specified in their contract.
By Erin Hennessy, Annie Allison and Logan Kotler
Copyright, Fortnite and the Ability to Protect How You Shake Your Groove Thing
The U.S. Supreme Court just crashed the copyright world’s latest dance party — stepping on the toes of a soiree of copyright infringement lawsuits against videogame developer Epic Games, the creator of Fortnite.
By John P. Isacson
IPRs have now been conducted for several years, and litigation has ensued over the procedures by which they are conducted. Decisions have been rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which have resolved some issues, created others, and altered procedures.
By Amanda H. Wilcox
Social media is growing up, and this means that brands of all sizes and across all industries are using social media as part of their marketing strategy. However, courts have confirmed that the basic tenets of intellectual property law and advertising law still apply. The following guidelines stem from common questions that clients often have in the area of social media marketing.
By Jeff Ginsberg and Zhiqiang Liu
Federal Circuit Declines to Follow Patent Office’s Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance In Affirming Trial Court’s Decision That Claims Are Directed to Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter