As we wrote in Part 1 of this series, the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (“TMA”) was signed into law on December 27, 2020, and contained several significant amendments to the Lanham Act. This post will cover three of the...more
It’s been an annual tradition here at The TMCA to write about a trademark and copyright dispute between Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. and My Other Bag, Inc. (“MOB”) over a line of canvas tote bags that parodied Louis...more
3/26/2019
/ Attorney's Fees ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Dilution ,
Fashion Branding ,
Lanham Act ,
Louis Vuitton ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Parody ,
The Copyright Act ,
Trademark Bullying ,
Trademark Infringement
Andy Warhol once famously commented that “In the future everybody will be world famous for fifteen minutes.” For trademarks, fifteen minutes of fame is not sufficient to assert a trademark dilution claim. ...more
In light of ongoing litigation over an applicant’s effort to register the mark FUCT for wearing apparel, the USPTO recently issued an Examination Guide concerning the review of trademark applications under Section 2(a) of the...more
In January 2016 and January 2017, we blogged about a trademark and copyright dispute between Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. and My Other Bag, Inc. (“MOB”) over a line of canvas tote bags that parodied Louis Vuitton’s iconic...more
1/19/2018
/ Attorney's Fees ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Dilution ,
Exceptions ,
Fashion Branding ,
Lanham Act ,
Louis Vuitton ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Parody ,
Summary Judgment ,
The Copyright Act
When two different companies adopt confusingly similar trademarks and use them in different parts of the United States, complications ensue. The adjudication of the respective rights of the parties will depend on the...more
What is the difference between an advertisement that is literally false by necessary implication and one that is impliedly false? It may seem like a fine (and somewhat opaque) distinction, but determining the particular way...more
On September 9, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an interesting decision in a false advertising case involving a dispute between competitors in the home pregnancy testing market. Church & Dwight Co. v....more
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act is generally considered a broad-based vehicle for asserting false advertising claims. For the owner and operator of the Trump Hotel Las Vegas, however, the statutory section was not broad...more
Can you trademark a building design? You can if the building in question is the Empire State Building. In the film classic King Kong, the iconic art deco building is the site of a titanic battle between Kong and the military...more
We blogged last week about a recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium, Inc. v. Security University, LLC, in which the Court...more
If a defendant in a trademark case uses the plaintiff’s trademark, not to identify the defendant’s own products, but rather to refer accurately to the plaintiff’s products, is that trademark infringement? Called “nominative...more
A recent precedential Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision provides valuable guidance on the proper allocation of trademark registration ownership as between a corporate parent and a subsidiary, highlighting the perils...more
4/20/2016
/ Corporate Counsel ,
Lanham Act ,
Parent Corporation ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Subsidiaries ,
Trademark Cancellation ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Void ab initio ,
Young Lawyers
A recent district court decision granting a preliminary injunction in The Brooklyn Brewery Corp. v. Black Ops Brewing, Inc. demonstrates the advantage of owning a federal trademark registration when products bearing the...more
In a recent post, we discussed the trademark parody defense in the context of a California district court decision holding that the owner of the Superman “S” logo had adequately stated infringement claims asserted against a...more
Positive results of scientific research on a company’s products can provide a tempting topic for advertising and promotion. If an article published in a well-established, peer-reviewed journal says that your company’s...more
On June 12, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., No. 12-761, which confirms that federal false advertising claims can be brought against false or misleading...more
6/17/2014
/ Advertising ,
Coca Cola ,
Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Food Labeling ,
Lanham Act ,
NLEA ,
POM Wonderful ,
POM Wonderful v Coca Cola ,
Popular ,
SCOTUS