Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Trademark Board's Precedential Ruling on Use in Commerce Image

Trademark Board's Precedential Ruling on Use in Commerce

Howard J. Shire & Jeremy S. Boczko

In a nearly 50-page precedential opinion in a ruling of great significance to the entertainment industry, a TTAB panel of judges recently underscored the need to prove actual use in commerce in order to register a trademark, regardless of how low the standard for use under the Lanham Act has recently become.

Features

Federal Circuit Holds Scandalous or Immoral Marks Entitled to Registration Image

Federal Circuit Holds Scandalous or Immoral Marks Entitled to Registration

Stacey C. Kalamaras

<b><i>Refusal Is an Unconstitutional Violation of Free Speech</b></i><p>On Dec. 15, 2017, a unanimous Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that despite Appellant's mark comprising “immoral or scandalous” matter, the PTO could no longer refuse federal registration of such marks on the grounds that this refusal violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Features

TTAB: Trademark Use Must be Proven Image

TTAB: Trademark Use Must be Proven

Howard J. Shire & Jeremy S. Boczko

<b><i>Board Says It Doesn't Matter Whether Use Is By a Trademark Owner Or a Third Party</b></i><p>In a nearly 50-page precedential opinion, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) panel of Judges Adlin, Heasely, and Lynch, underscored the need to prove actual use in commerce in order to register a trademark, regardless of how low the standard for use under the Lanham Act has recently become. <i>Tao Licensing, LLC, v. Bender Consulting d/b/a Asia Pacific Beverages.</i>

Features

The Case for Use of Accelerated Case Resolution in TTAB Proceedings Image

The Case for Use of Accelerated Case Resolution in TTAB Proceedings

Chris Bussert & Harris Henderson

This article outlines the available options under the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's ACR rules and discusses the strategic considerations in determining whether ACR might be advantageous, particularly in light of increasing pressure from clients to reduce costs and expedite the decision-making process.

Features

Decision of Note<br><i>Empire</i> TV Show Doesn't Infringe Hip-Hop Label Trademark Image

Decision of Note<br><i>Empire</i> TV Show Doesn't Infringe Hip-Hop Label Trademark

Stan Soocher

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided that the Fox TV show <i>Empire</i> didn't violate federal Lanham Act or California trademark rights of the urban music record label Empire Distribution.

Columns & Departments

Bit Parts Image

Bit Parts

Stan Soocher

No Trademark Protection for <i>Dirty Dancing</i> Phrase Used in Financial Services Ad

Features

Protecting Product Packaging and Product Configuration Image

Protecting Product Packaging and Product Configuration

Marcus S. Harris

Registering and protecting product designs is challenging. Preliminarily, trade dress cannot be registered or protected as a trademark if it is functional — if it is “essential to the use or purpose of the article or it affects the cost or quality of the article.”

Features

What Will Impact Be of Supreme Court's <i>Tam</i> Decision? Image

What Will Impact Be of Supreme Court's <i>Tam</i> Decision?

Theodore H. Davis Jr. & Samuel T. Kilb

In <i>Matal v. Tam</i>, the trademark case involving the name of the Asian-American rock band The Slants, the SCOTUS held that the portion of §2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), that prohibits the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Features

<i>Matal v. Tam</i> and Viewpoint-Discriminatory Prohibitions Against Federal Registration Image

<i>Matal v. Tam</i> and Viewpoint-Discriminatory Prohibitions Against Federal Registration

Theodore H. Davis Jr. & Samuel T. Kilb

In <i>Matal v. Tam,</i> the SCOTUS held that a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), prohibiting the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

Features

Manufacturers vs. Exclusive Distributors: Who Owns the Trademarks? Image

Manufacturers vs. Exclusive Distributors: Who Owns the Trademarks?

Kyle-Beth Hilfer

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.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • The Roadmap of Litigation Analytics
    Litigation analytics can be considered a roadmap of sorts — an important guide to ensure the legal professional arrives at the correct litigation strategy or business plan. However, like roadmaps, litigation analytics will only be useful if it's based on data that is complete and accurate.
    Read More ›
  • Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards Bodies
    Chances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations &mdash; keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization &mdash; such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.
    Read More ›