« April 2003 | Main | June 2003 »

May 30, 2003

Ernie the Attorney vs. the Nifty Fifty

Article on law blogs which proves that Ernie the Attorney is more popular than the 'best' law firm websites.


Tidbit arising out of my own insecurity: while my links pale in comparison to those of Ernie, this site also has more inbound links than those of the sites listed in the article.


Aside: Actual traffic is a better indicator of website popularity than inbound links.  It's hard to say what the number of inbound links is a good indicator for.


Final aside: Revenue is a better indicator of law firm marketing success than  website popularity.

SOFTSOAP v. SMOOTHSOAP



According to this article, Colgate Palmolive, owner of, among other products,  SOFTSOAP liquid hand soap, is suing Blue Cross Labs, producer of, among other products, SMOOTHSOAP liquid hand soap, for trademark and trade dress infringement. 

May 28, 2003

The Color of Pills

Plainitff Shire manufactures and sells ADDERALL which is prescribed for ADHD.  It moved to enjoin defendant Barr Lab's generic alternative on the grounds that it infringed Shire's trade dress in the shape and color of the pill.  The Third Circuit affirmed the refsual of the motion for preliminary injunction because Shire did not establish that its trade dress was non-functional.  The case has a thorough discussion of the functionality of color in medication.  The district court had credited testimony that color coding of meds was particularly functional for ADHD patients.


Manufacturers of branded medication will be reaching for their Zantac when they read the testimony from an executive from Rite-Aid, who testified that a generic drug's visual similarity to the branded drug is in effect functional as it aids in the generic version's acceptance.


Shire v. Barr, No. 02-3647 (3d Cir. May 23, 2003).

Settlement re: "Your Computer Is Broadcasting Your IP Address" Ads

Via BNA, a MSNBC article reporting that, Bonzi, an online advertiser, settled a lawsuit, apparently brought by a class-action law firm, regarding its advertisements which mimic a Windows dialogue box and state that your computer is broadcasting an IP address.  The advertiser agreed in an order entered in Washington state court that:    



* Future Bonzi ad banners designed to look like Windows dialogue boxes will contain the word “Advertisement” — and it will be the same size as other words in the header.
* Bonzi ads won’t contain minimize, maximize, or “x” buttons that do not actually perform their usual function.
* “OK” buttons on such dialogue boxes will be changed to read “More Info.”
* Bonzi’s ads will also no longer assert that users’ computers are “broadcasting” their IP addresses

Democrats, WD-40 and Duct Tape


Via NameProtect, an article on WD-40 protesting slippery Texas Democrats referring to themselves as the WD-40s.   Another article here.


WD-40's slogan is "We Live Under The Sink, In The Garage and in the Toolboxes of the World."


Attorney General Ashcroft is credited with popularizing the expression that you only need two things in life, duct tape for things that move that shouldn't and WD-40 for things that don't move that should.


The Duct Tape/WD-40 Cam is here.

Corporate Names and Domain Names Alone Do Not Equal Trademark Rights.

Decent article from BusinessWeek Online explaining how registering a corporate name and registering a domain name alone, do not create protectable trademark rights.

Personal Names and Google URLs

Dave Weinberger on domain names, personal names and Google URLs, via The Guardian.

May 27, 2003

Google and 'Anti' Adwords

The Register on Google pulling 'negative' adwords regarding UK retailer Dixons.  There is also a subscriber-only article on the matter from the Australian Financial Review.  Background here.

May 26, 2003

Fed Circuit on Geographically Misdescriptive Marks

 Federal Circuit case reversing and remanding the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board rejection of a trademark application:  A geographically mis-descriptive mark will be rejected if the PTO shows that mis-descriptiveness was material to the public's decision to buy the product (which it did not in this case). I might care if my Tillamook Chedder isn't from Tillamook County.  I might not care if my California Innovations insulated diaper bag is not from California.  In re California Innovations, Inc., 02-1407 (Fed Cir May 22, 2002) (via Finnegans).

May 25, 2003

Know Your Cheese Names: PECORINO ROMANO




Pecorino Romano, literally 'sheep's milk from Rome,' is one of the more popular grating cheeses in the world.  Eaten by Romulus himself, PECORINO ROMANO is a Protected Designation of Origin in Europe and a Certification Mark in the U.S., where the Pecorino Romano consortium certifes that the cheese must conform to the following:



(1) characteristics (hard; cylindrical shape with flat sides; generally produced in blocks between 20 and 35 kg in weight and between 25 and 35 cm in height; rind is eventually coated with white or black natural plastic films; compact, white or slightly straw-yellow body; characteristic piquant taste; minimum of 36% fat on the dried substance);


(ii) production methods (made from 100% whole, fresh sheep's milk curdled with lamb's rennet between October and July; dry or humid salted in special places; aged at least five months not for grating use or at least eight months for grating use); and


(iii) regional origin (the area of Italy comprising the territory of the regions of Latium and Sardinia and the province of Grosseto (Tuscany)).


Use of the term "PECORINO ROMANO" on cheese that does not meet all of the aforesaid requirements is punishable in Italy by fine or imprisonment.


LOCATELLI ROMANO is not a PDO but a brand, owned by Nestle.

Important 4th Circuit Case on Definition of Trademark Use By Non-U.S. Companies

37 page opinion, 25 page dissent on whether a non-us company can bring a Lanham Act claim based on the mere advertisement of its trademarks in the U.S.  Important case in the era of the Internet, analysis to follow.


International Bancorp v. Societe des Bains de Mer et du Cerde des Estrangers a Monaco, No. 02-1364 (4th Cir Cir. May 19, 2003).

May 23, 2003

Multiple Overtimes Likely for Arsenal




Peter Brownlow of Bird and Bird, our correspondent at the House of Lords. writes to tell us of a decision handed down this morning which appears to contradict the Court of Appeal decision in the Arsenal case, which Peter analyzed here yesterday.


"The House of Lords handed down a decision in the criminal counterfeiting case:  Regina -v- Johnstone. The judgment appears to have been written without sight of the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Arsenal and also deals with the issue of whether "trade mark use" is necessary for trade mark infringement.


In yesterday's Court of Appeal judgment in Arsenal, Aldous LJ stated:


It is important to note that the ECJ is not concerned with whether the use complained about is trade mark use.  The consideration is whether the third party's use affects or is likely to affect the functions of the trade mark.


However the Law Lords who gave judgments in today's decision appear to have interpreted the decision of the ECJ in the Arsenal case as requiring "trade mark use". 


The background to the case is that Mr Johnstone was charged with having committed criminal offences under section 92 Trade Marks Act 1994 by including on counterfeit CD labels  the name of the group or artist whose performance was recorded on the CD in question eg "Bon Jovi", "U2", "Rolling Stones", etc.  Mr Johnstone argued that his use merely described the contents of the products bearing the words i.e. music by "Bob Jovi", etc and the House of Lords was asked to consider whether "trade mark use" was necessary for civil infringement under s.10(1) Trade Marks Act 1994 (identical goods/identical marks).


Both Law Lords  held that the ECJ in the Arsenal decision had decided that trade mark use was necessary for infringement under section 10(1) to (3) and that section 92 was therefore to be interpreted as applying only when the offending sign is used as an indication of trade origin.


However the House of Lords stated that in the Arsenal case trade mark use had been found by the ECJ.
Use of the Arsenal logo was not intended for purely descriptive purposes. The use was such as to create the impression 'that there is a material link in the course of trade between the goods concerned and the trade mark proprietor': see para 56. Whether it was open to the European Court to reach this factual conclusion has proved controversial: see [2002] All E R (D) 180. The rights and wrongs of this particular controversy are not material to the outcome of the present case.


The factual situations in the two cases are different but the two Courts appear to have reached opposite conclusions as to whether the ECJ held that "trade mark use" is necessary for infringement. This can only increase the likelihood of Mr Reed being given leave to appeal to the House of Lords."


Thanks again to Peter.

Louis Touton Steps Down as ICANN GC

Esme Smith of Jones Day will be interim GC while a search is conducted, more details here

Actual Malice Back on the Air

Good to see that Actual Malice is blogging regularly again.  Too many good items to single out one.  Just click here and scroll down.

Arsenal win on Aggregate - Laddie gets red card - Reed seeking replay at Lords


A sports fan at Bird and Bird writes:


"Judgment was handed down yesterday by the Court of Appeal in Arsenal Football Club PLC -v- Matthew Reed


In summary they overturned Mr Justice Laddie on his finding that:


1.      the ECJ decision was not binding on him in all respects; and


2.      that on the facts Reed's use of the trade mark did not designate origin (ie the "trade mark use" point").


They also cast doubt on his reasoning on passing off decision even though this was not appealed by pointing out he had referred to the wrong case.


The judgment is very brand owner friendly and seems to make the question of whether or not something is "use as a trade mark" is irrelevant to the question of TM infringement.


Is the ruling of the ECJ Binding ?


AldousLJ explained that the ECJ decision was not based on whether the use complained of was "trade mark use".  Instead the relevant consideration was whether the use complained of was likely to jeopardise the guarantee of origin which constitutes the essential function of the mark. That did not depend on whether the use complained of was trade mark use.


The ECJ gave two examples of how Reed's use affected the functions of the trade mark:


1.      Consumers who obtain or are given the product away from the environs of Mr Reed's stall may believe there is a link between the goods and Arsenal;


The Court of Appeal said this was not inconsistant with the Judges findings of fact. He was concerned with the effects of the signs upon Mr Reed's customers, not upon consumers who might not know anything about Mr Reed.


2.      The goods are supplied outside the control of AFC. This undermines the guarante that all goods designated by the trade mark have been manufactured or supplied under the control of a single entity.


The Court of Appeal rejected the claim by Reed that this also contained findings of fact contrary to those of the Judge.  The Judge's findings related to whether use by Mr Reed was "trade mark use" - the ECJ was looking at the function of the trade mark. Clearly unchecked use of the mark by a 3rd party (which is not descriptive use) is likely to damage the function of the trade mark because the registration will no longer be able to guarantee origin.


The Court of Appeal held that the Judge had misinterpreted the ECJ's decision - finding that it decided that Arsenal should win because Mr Reed's use was such as would be perceived by some customers as a designation of origin. This was not the basis of the ECJ decision. The ECJ had held that the important consideration is whether the right given by the resgistration is likely to be affected by a third party's use.


"Trade Mark Use"


Although not necessary because of the finding above - the Court of Appeal found on the evidence that the use by Mr Reed of "Arsenal" did designate origin of the goods to a substantial number of consumers.


Passing Off


Even though it was not the subject of an appeal by Arsenal the Court of Appeal cast doubt on Laddie's reasoning on passing off. 


Unsurprisingly the Court of Appeal refused Reed leave to appeal to the House of Lords but he has indicated he will be applying to them to seek leave."


Thank you to Peter for this (including the title).


More coverage here and here.


Previous blog coverage here.

May 22, 2003

Billy-Bob Teeth v. Novelty, Inc.?



This really is a Seventh Circuit case as to whether there can be a binding oral assignment of copyright in fake novelty teeth.  Plaintiff made Austin Powers' teeth.  The decision offers numerous insights into a hitherto misunderstood product.

May 21, 2003

Are You Being Gatored?


Ben Edelman has released a preliminary report on Gator, which monitors users' visits and provides targeted pop-up advertising.  Ben has devised a method for discerning which third-parties may be using Gator to target a particular website.  Ben describes his report as follows:



"I today released "Documentation of Gator Advertisements and Targeting," a report that describes my methodology and findings, including more than seven thousand speciic web sites targeted by Gator.  My report also offers users a web form for testing whether Gator targets specified sites, and if it does, viewing the speciic ads Gator shows."


I have used Ben's services on behalf of a client and his test appears to do what he says it does.


 

May 20, 2003

Ham and Cheese Defeat Wal-Mart Before ECJ


Producers of Prosciutto di Parma ham and Grana Padano cheese prevailed in the European Court of Justice as the ECJ upheld laws requiring purveyours of products bearing those appellations of origin to perform certain processes (in this case slicing the ham and grating the cheese) in the region of origin.  Parties to the cases (including Wal-Mart's ASDA supermarket) had been importing the products from Italy and processing them abroad.  The Court, in its unofficial press release, noted that:



. . . the grating of cheese and slicing of ham and their packaging constitute important operations which may damage the quality and authenticity and consequently the reputation of the PDO [protected designation of origin] if those requirements are not complied with. The specifications for Grana Padano cheese and Parma ham define checks and detailed strict operations in order to preserve the reputation of those two products.


The PDOs of those products would not be protected in the same way by an obligation imposed on operators outside the region of production to inform consumers by appropriate labelling that grating, slicing and packaging have taken place outside that region. There are therefore no alternative, less restrictive measures to attain the objective pursued.

However, the Court finds that the protection conferred by a PDO does not normally extend to operations such as grating, slicing and packaging the product. The Court states that those operations are prohibited to third parties outside the region of production only if that is expressly laid down in the specification. The principle of legal certainty requires that adequate publicity be given to those prohibitions - for example being mentioned … - to bring them to the attention of third parties. In the absence of such publicity, those prohibitions cannot be relied on before a national court.


The link to the decision will be available shortly on the www.curia.eu.int site.


More info on Parma here.


More info on Grano Padano here.


European Union's searchable database of PDOs here.


 

May 18, 2003

Prof. Lessig Asks For Your Help re Copyright Terms

Prof. Lessig is soliciting support to introduce a bill into Congress re amending the Copyright Act re: copyright terms.  Details here.

Catching RIAA Spiders

Interesting discussion on Kuro5hin.org re how to build tarpits to catch RIAA spiders.

May 17, 2003

The Trademark Blog Turns One Today

The Trademark Blog started a year ago today.  I sent in my renewal fee to Radio Userland yesterday.  Thanks guys for creating a great program.


In the past year:


-two people wrote me to warn that the Nigerian bank email was a scam;


-one person wrote to inform that contrary to what I had written, chutzpah is not a Native American Indian word;


-one person asked me if I could put him in touch with Jessica Lynch;


-two people asked if they could have Mecca Cola distributorships;


-many people came looking for picture of the Marriot Sisters and Ben Aflac.  Many more came because both they and I had mis-spelled it as "Help, I'm a Celebrity . . ." (sic).


-monthly traffic increased more than 400%.


Over a thousand people (impossible to estimate anymore due to aggregators) are reading every day about a field of law once described by the New York Times as "an arcane sub-specialty."  Not even a specialty.


Special thanks to Ernie and Denise for encouragement and those critical early links.  Thanks to Bret for inspiring me and allocating to me the trademark.blog.us name.  Thanks to Nathan for writing those great tools.


 

May 16, 2003

Oddities and Ironies in the Paid-Search Arena

At least three companies other than Overture appear to have purchased OVERTURE as a keyword on Google.  No one other than Google  appears to have purchased the keyword GOOGLE on Google.


At least one company other than Google appears to have purchased the keyword GOOGLE on Overture.  At least twelve companies other than Overture appear to have purchased the keyword OVERTURE on Overture.

New.Net v. Ad-Aware: Who are you calling Scumware?



Interesting fact pattern: New.net provides software that allows a browser to utilize 'alternate root' domain names (domain names that end in .video or .shop, for example, top level domains that have not been added to 'true' A root).  LavaSoft sells Ad-Aware (which it bills as 'the morning -after pill for the Internet') which allows a user to discover and remove 'scumware', 'data mining software' and other bad programs that have been installed, perhaps surreptitiously, on the user's computer.  Ad-Aware identifies New.net's software as badware and uninstalls it, allegedly crashing the user's computer in the process.  New.net says that its software is not badware, and saying that it is constitutes false advertising, trade libel, and other things.  Here is the complaint filed in the Central District of California, via Bret's Lextext.com site.

Eyewitness News Covers Purse Parties

Transcript of WLWT of Cincinnati on 'purse parties' where suburban women sell counterfeit goods.  Two points that purse-party attendees tend not to be aware of: (1) selling counterfeit goods is a federal crime; and (2) the proceeds of counterfeit goods sales often benefit organized crime.

May 15, 2003

Unsolicited Client Testimonial

An apparently happy client posted this about me

Legal Ramifications of Blair Scandal

Interesting discussion by New York Lawyer on legal ramifications of NY Times Blair scandal.

Subtle Marketing Point

LegalWeek list of Top 50 US Firms by Fee Income, 2002.

May 14, 2003

Sadie Hawkins v. Lizze McGuire


Bret writes to tell us of:  Capp Enterprises v. Disney, CV03-3357 GAF, filed yesterday in Los Angeles, regarding Disney's use of Capp's registered SADIE HAWKINS DAY trademark in the upcoming May 17 episode of Disney's 'Lizzie McGuire' show.


In the Al Capp comic strip L'il Abner, Sadie Hawkins (pictured left) was so ugly, her father, the mayor of Dogpatch, ordered that November 13 be Sadie Hawkins Day.  Every man in Dogpatch  was given a 10 minutes running start, and Sadie could marry the man she caught.  Sadie Hawkins Day dances, where women asked the men to dance, became all the rage.


Other contributions to American culture from L'il Abner include the Shmoo, Fearless Fosdick, and Joe Btfsplk, who always has a cloud hanging over him.

May 13, 2003

9th Circuit: 'Unreasonably Pervasive' Meta-tag Usage Enjoined




Plaintiff owns a federal registration for PYCNOGENOL, an anti-oxidant which is derived from French tree bark.  Defendant advertised its product as MASQUELIER'S: THE ORIGINAL FRENCH PYCNOGENOL, and inserted PYCNOGENOL into its meta-tags.  Plaintiff brought infringement and dilution claims.  On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held, under its nominative fair use test (see recent fair use cases here and here) that while Defendant could make some reference to PYCNOGENOL, its use in meta-tags (which it apparently admitted had done so to affect its search engine ranking) was 'unreasonably pervasive' and therefore exceeded the second and third prongs of the fair use test, namely that it exceeded the minimal amount necessary to refer to plaintiff's mark, and that such use was likely to cause confusion. The Court did not elaborate on how pervasive was unreasonably pervasive, and whether it viewed any meta-tag use at all as unreasonably pervasive.


The dilution cause was remanded per Mosely.


I look forward to a Ninth Circuit review of the Northern District of California Taxes.com case, discussed here.


Aside: I put PYCNOGENOL into Google today.  The Google abstract of the third hit referred to PYCNOGENOL but the site it turned up, which sells the competing product, does not.


Horphag v. Pelligrini et. al., no. 01-56733 (9th Cir. May 9, 2003) Text here.

Anti-Plagiarism Software

Perhaps if the NY Times had used the anti-plagiarism software that this Kansas City teacher used to catch 28 of her students, then it wouldn't be in its present predicament.  Link via Nathan, minister of information systems at Schwimmerlegal.

May 12, 2003

Sixth Circuit Decision on Use of Celebrity Name in Title

The rap group OutKast released a song entitled 'Rosa Parks.'  The second line of the lyrics is 'Everybody move to the back of the bus.'  The song was used to promote OutKast's album and the words ROSA PARKS were used on the sticker on the packaging of the CD.  Civil-rights figure Rosa Parks (well-known for her refusal to move to the back of a bus) brought suit under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, and right of publicity and otherstate claims.  Defendant successfully moved to have the suit dismissed on summary judgement.  Ms. Parks appealed.


The Sixth Circuit reversed the grant of summary judgement.  It set out 3 tests for analyzing the use of a celebrity name in a title of a work:


1 - Does the title create a likelihood of confusion?


2 - Alternative avenues - Were there alternative means for the defendant to express its idea?


3 - 'Fred and Ginger' test - Was the use of the name artistically relevant to the work? (named after the case involving the move 'Fred and Ginger,' about dancers who imitate Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, for a living).  The Second Circuit held that it would bar use of a name on a title if there was no artistic relevance or if there was relevance, if use of the title explicitly misleads as to source.


Here, the Sixth Circuit adopted the Second Circuit test, and held that it was a triable issue of fact to determine whether the use of ROSA PARKS had artistic relevance to the song.  Case was remanded to determine that question.


The case contains a good discussion of the extent to which persona will be protected under Section 43(a).


tidbit:  Johnnie Cochran represented Ms. Parks.


Text of decision here.


Audio sample of 'Rosa Parks' via Amazon here.

Why Trade Secrets Need to be Protected

top hat with bunny


AP Reports that Uncle Tony the Magician and 20 other Brazilian magicians successfully sued TV Globo for airing a progran that revealed how magicians perform magic tricks.  Plaintiffs alleged that their revenue decreased by 70% because many people lost interest in magic after learning how the tricks were performed.  Link via Weirdofthenews.

May 11, 2003

Working Lawyers For Working People sue Lawyers Working For Working People

Trademark dispute regarding slogans for labor lawyers reported here.

Maybe Atari Democrats Will Return As Well

Via BrandweekInfogrames, maker of video games such as 'Enter the Matrix,' has changed its name to Atari. Atari means 'success' or 'luck' in Japanese. 


The Atari History Museum is here.

May 10, 2003

Question for Der Rechtsanwalt

I was watching a movie with (in my view) an excessive number of 'product placements,' and was reminded of this recent decision in Germany  prohibiting pop-up ads, reportedly on the rationale that they force 'the user to take without notice.'  Could this rationale be applied to product placements in movies exhibited in Germany?

Metasearch Back Up

OK, Japan took their online database down for the weekend and that screwed up the metasearch for a while.  The metasearch is back up, minus Japan. 

May 09, 2003

More on Spoofing Peer to Peer Networks

The Register on side efects of self-help policing infringement on peer to peer networks.

Back from Amsterdam

They won't announce attendance figures for a while but it seemed as if many many corporations and firms did not allow their people to attend the International Trademark Association annual meeting in Amsterdam.  The fact that Hong Kong is now identified as Hong Kong, SAR (special adminstrative region) on people's badges was one more annoyance for attendees from that region.  This was the first INTA ever held outside North America and it's too bad it occurred under these conditions.

May 01, 2003

Azerbaijani Trademark News

This is the first item I've ever posted from Baku Today, regarding the LUX trademark, to be used in connection with chicken, dairy products, ice cream, and a 'new sort of beer.'

Arsenal Trademark Case Proceeds

More on the Arsenal football team trademark case via bbc.com.  Background here.

Blogging Live From Europe

I typed in my friend's SSID number and I had broadband. This WiFi thing is great.