The SharkNinja case as well as other well-established precedents serve as powerful reminders to advertisers of certain best-practices in choosing their trademarks or evaluating whether to challenge their competitors' trademarks.
The likelihood of confusion analysis is often focused on confusion at the time of purchase, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth and Federal Circuits permit mark holders to allege infringement based on presale, initial-interest confusion. Earlier this year, the Eighth Circuit joined the majority of circuits in permitting recovery for initial-interest confusion in certain circumstances.
the Tenth Circuit held that the Lanham Act can have extraterritorial application, if certain conditions are met. In doing so, the appellate court recognized — and further deepened — an ongoing circuit split.
Nike Seeks $150 Million In Sanctions from Six Chinese Banks, and Loses
The agency announced that the Department of Commerce has applied to register the USPTO's marks in a bid to crack down on scammers who are impersonating the agency.
Copyright lawsuit filings declined significantly over the last two years, according to a new report by Lex Machina, which found that overall cases had dipped from a 2018 peak that was driven primarily by surges in file-sharing litigation.
In two recent cases, the Second Circuit provided guidance as to the circumstances that may give rise to liability for counterfeiting, as distinct from mere infringement, and addressed liability for contributory infringement for counterfeiting.
In some instances the appearance of third-party intellectual property on items purchased, owned and customized by the purchaser may be legal under the doctrines of first sale and fair use.
The new, more than 5,000-page spending bill, which includes the latest COVID-19 relief, had a few surprises under its cover. Two of those surprises focus directly on intellectual property and amount to sea changes in the trademark and copyright infringement realms.
In Blumenthal Distributing, Inc. v. Herman Miller, Inc., the 9th Circuit considered whether or not the or not the best-selling piece of furniture ever is functional.
