The Trademark Office has since issued a refusal of the Reynolds application on grounds that “JOHNNY FOOTBALL” identifies a particular living individual (i.e., Manziel), and the trademark application did not contain his consent. Under U.S. Trademark Law, written consent is required for registration of a mark containing a name, nickname, stage name or pseudonym of a living individual. Reynolds submitted arguments aga
Category: Intellectual Property Law
Clif Bar Sued For Trade Dress Infringment
As reported by Business Wire, KIND, LLC (“KIND”), a relative newcomer in the snack bar market, has filed a Complaint in federal court in New York against Clif Bar & Company (“Clif Bar”) over packaging for Clif Bar’s new line of “Mojo” trail mix bars. KIND has also sought a preliminary injunction, asking the Court to prevent Clif Bar from introducing its new packaging pending a trial. KIND’s Complaint is for trade d
Italy “Up In Arms” Over Ad Showing Michelangelo’s Iconic Statue David Cradling A Rifle
The Italian government is reportedly “up in arms” over an Illinois firearms manufacturer’s advertisement showing Michelangelo’s famous “David” sculpture holding a rifle — but if news reports are right, the Italian government is using the “wrong weapon” in the battle. The international outrage stems from an advertisement created by ArmaLite, Inc. showing David holding an AR-50A1 (which retails for over $3,000) wit
Litigation Brewing Over Use Of “B Strong” Trademark
From a trademark perspective, the Aboud Foundation has a valid point. While the Red Sox surely had honorable intentions in adopting and using “B STRONG”, and while they have donated the proceeds to charity, the Aboud Foundation appears to have valid trademark rights. In a trademark infringement litigation to enforce those rights, the Aboud Foundation could seek an injunction prohibiting the Red Sox from continuing
“Dumb Starbucks”: Clever Parody Or Trademark Violation
As reported by the Los Angeles Times, a new coffee shop recently opened under the name “DUMB STARBUCKS COFFEE” in a Los Angeles neighborhood. The store, which has since closed, utilized the distinctive trademarks, logos and colors made famous by Starbucks Corporation (“Starbucks”), which has more than 20,000 stores in 63 countries. The “DUMB STARBUCKS” store was very similar to an authentic “STARBUCKS”, except that
‘The Hobbit’ Franchise Spawns Lawsuit Over Revenue
Last month, heavyweight movie producers (and brothers) Harvey and Robert Weinstein, co-founders of Miramax Films, filed a lawsuit in Manhattan against New Line Cinema Corporation and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. claiming they were cut out of their fair share revenues from the hugely successful series of films based on J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit.
University Of Texas Protects Trademarks Incorporating Coach’s Name
the University of Texas has now taken steps to protect trademarks incorporating Coach Strong’s name. Shortly after he was hired, unauthorized merchandise utilizing the words “STRONGHORNS”, “TEXAS STRONG” and “UT STRONG” showed up online and in retail stores. Now, the University of Texas is attempting to eradicate such usage, sending cease and desist letters to demand the removal of such items from sale.
The Starbucks “Duffin” Dispute — Part Two: Strategies For Avoiding Trademark Disputes Before They Start
We reported here about a trademark dispute between Starbucks and a London pastry shop owner over the name “Duffin” for a pastry that’s a cross between a doughnut and a muffin. Although the pastry shop owner used the “Duffin” trademark first, Starbucks was first to register the mark. How can you avoid a similar dispute in the first place?
Update: Court Dismisses Trademark Infringement Litigation Brought By Trader Joe’s
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington has now dismissed the case, holding that it lacks jurisdiction to apply the Lanham Act, the law governing trademarks in the United States. The majority of the claims asserted by Trader Joe’s sounded in trademark law.
Update: E.A. Sports And Collegiate Licensing Company Reportedly Agree To Pay $40 Million To Settle Right Of Publicity Litigation
As reported by The New York Times, Electronic Arts and Collegiate Licensing Company have now agreed to settle the California lawsuit by making a payment to the former collegiate athletes. The amount of the settlement, while not disclosed in court papers, has been reported to be $40 million. The settlement does not involve the NCAA, which remains a defendant in the case and has indicated its intention to continue to
|
|
|
 |
|
 |