Protectable rights are created the same way a successful brand is established — linking your Mark and your company’s offering in the minds of the consumer is a must. The good news? Regardless of your company’s size or marketing budget, this necessary connection can be achieved.
“Not Merely Monkey Business”: The Bored Ape Case and NFT Branding in the Ninth Circuit
In brand protection, as in bridge engineering, the strength of brand differentiation (trademark distinctiveness) depends on the integrity of each supporting cable. When one snaps, the question is not only whether you can fix that component, but also whether the whole structure will hold together long enough for the repair crew to arrive.
On April 8, a California jury found that R.C. Bigelow, Inc., the well-known manufacturer of Bigelow teas, intentionally or recklessly misled consumers by claiming that some of its teabags were “Manufactured in the USA.” The price for this mislabeling was steep, with the jury awarding the class action plaintiffs $2.36 million.
Today, building brands solely on the promise of a different product or service has become unsustainable. Any “new and improved” feature or benefit is quickly eclipsed by competitors. Consequently, brands signal category superiority not through rational claims, but by reinforcing a distinct persona — a “ness” comprised of distinguishing traits and behaviors that form an ownable brand essence difficult for competitors to replicate.
In a recent case, although finding no standing in the case in front of it, a federal court noted that it was, however, possible that a nonuser could demonstrate entitlement to cancel or oppose by establishing either lost sales in the United States or reputational injury in the United States under the Lanham Act.
A federal judge in California declined to stop the debut of the new Netflix series Running Point that Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA, claims infringes on its trademarks by using the mascot name, the “Waves,” and colors of the private Christian college.
At the end of the day, demand letters form an important part of a company's trademark enforcement strategy. But they must be just that — a part of a fully developed reasoned strategy rather than a knee-jerk reaction to perceived infringement. And that strategy will require some investigation and research to help ensure success.
Federal Circuit: PTAB Jurisdiction Exists Over Expired PatentsFederal Circuit: No Estoppel on Unadjudicated Claims
Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide a $43 million suit between two real estate developers over the name “Dewberry.” The crux of the case once it reached SCOTUS is the extent to which courts can award the profits, not of the named defendant, but of the defendant’s affiliate for trademark infringement.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
