« October 2007 | Main | December 2007 »

November 30, 2007

Are There Donut Lampshades In Your Background?

galbraith donut.jpg

donut snap rotate.jpg

We have this pillow and this sofa, in microfiber (because of the dogs) at home. Anyway, Galbraith & Paul owns the copyright in this donut design and someone, allegedly, produced lamp shades that allegedly infringe the fabric, and Ruby Tuesday has such lamps in its restaurants. It then ran photos of its restaurants with the lamps in the background in promotional materials (cropped example above).

Galbraith & Paul has now sued Ruby Tuesday in the SDNY, on copyright and trademark grounds.

Galbraith & Paul v. Ruby Tuesday, 07 cv 10512 (SDNY Nov. 29 2007)

PRACTICE POINTER: If you operate a business in some sort of public space, such as a restaurant, and you utilize a furnishing or a decoration that may contain a copyrightable element (such as a lampshade, or a wallpaper or a poster), then your use of such an item may constitute a public display of the work, and if the item is infringing, then you may have some exposure for copyright infringement. You may have a claim against the supply store that sold you the 50,000 lampshades or whatever, which you may be able to collect on if they still return phone calls. When buying items, even useful items like lamps and chairs, that will be displayed in public, you need reps and warranties and indemnification from the supplier, that will cover potential copyright and trade dress claims.

November 29, 2007

The Argument For Federal Rather Than State Trademark Registration

burger king illinois.jpg

Marketplace: "There's Only One Burger King In This Town":

"For 50 years, the Burger King in Mattoon, Ill., has been a favorite spot. And thanks to a judge's ruling, that other Burger King has had to keep its distance"

Short Paper On Domain Name Monetization

Good short (5 page) paper by UK domain name registry Nominet on domain name monetization.

"Can Typosquatting Be Counterfeiting?"

Discourse.net: "Can Typosquatting Be Counterfeiting?"

"The story there is about Dell bringing a very large and organized case against a bunch of domain tasters (people who register domain names for a very brief period then drop them, so they don’t have to pay for them) who were apparently typosquatting on a grand scale.

What makes the story interesting is that Dell’s lawyers threw in a counterfeiting claim into their complaint. It’s artfully worded, but the essence of it is that the counterfeits are the domain names, and/or the act of putting up web sites at the domain names that have popups or pop-under ads."

November 28, 2007

Trademark Blog Makes ABA Top 100

The Trademark Blog was selected as one of the ABA Journal Blawg 100 (it's in the 'black letter law' section. Check out the other 99 blogs.

November 27, 2007

Dagwood v. Dagwood

dagwood.jpg

A Dagwood sandwich is a very big sandwich, named after the comic strip character, Dagwood Bumsted, who liked to make big sandwiches. An Indiana company alleges that it has operated Dagwood sandwich shops in Indiana since the 80's. A nationwide chain, Dagwood Sandwich Shops, LLC, has federal registrations. The Indiana company sued the chain in Indiana state court; the chain has now removed to federal court.

Of interest: "Dagwood Sandwich" has become a dictionary word, while King Features still syndicates "Blondie and Dagwood."

Dagwood's Deli-sub Shop, Inc. v. Dagwood's Sandwich Shoppe, LLC, 2007cv01507 (S.D. Indiana Nov 21 2007).

November 26, 2007

"The Manolo's Guide to Holiday (Photo)Shopping"

Louboutin_MissFredTacco_SteveMadden_Becks.jpg

Counterfeit Chic: "The Manolo's Guide to Holiday (Photo)Shopping" commenting on the Manolo website pointing out the photos of the Christian Louboutin shoe on the left and the Steve Madden shoe on the right.

November 23, 2007

You Can See Me on PBS Here

I was on Thursday's edition of PBS' Nightly Business Report, which focused on intellectual property.. Here is the streamed version that will be at this link until 9 PM on Friday. I appear about 22 minutes into the show.

Here's the transcript of our segment (I appear with Prof. Noveck of New York Law School).

"Online Word of Mouth and its Implications for Trademark Law"

Prof Goldman: "Online Word of Mouth and its Implications for Trademark Law":

This Chapter discusses the emergence of online word of mouth, the process by which consumers disseminate their views about marketplace goods and services. Due to online word of mouth, consumers have an unprecedented ability to influence the brand perceptions of other consumers. Unfortunately, these effects have put doctrinal pressure on trademark law, leading to judicial interpretations that inhibit the flow of online word of mouth and may damage the efficacy of marketplace mechanisms. This Chapter will explore how trademark law should be interpreted to preserve the flow of socially beneficial online word of mouth.

This Is The Britney Spears Video LV Sued MTV Over

Blink and you miss the LV logo. There are some versions of "Do Something" on YouTube that seem to have the 1 second of LV footage edited out.

November 22, 2007

marty schwimmer pbs.jpg

Retro Brand Website

oldbrand.jpg

BrandlandUSA: "News and history on brand preservation. Help us save, promote and preserve historic brand names. Help BrandlandUSA™ bring back America's best-loved dead brands."

"Song BMG and MTV Online Guilty for Using Fake LV Logo"

LogoDesign Works: "Sony BMG and MTV Online Guilty for Using Fake Louis Vuitton Logo" (LV Logo used on dashboard of car in Britney SPears music video).

November 21, 2007

In-N-Out Burgers v. In & Out Tire & Auto

From our "cheap laugh from the name of the case" file:

In-n-Out Burgers v. In & Out Tire & Auto

Nevada District Court
- Trademark
Filed: November 20, 2007
Plaintiff: In-N-Out Burgers; Defendant: In & Out Tire & Auto, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2007cv01556

Las Vegas Trademark Attorney comments here.

November 20, 2007

General Steel v. Hogan & Hartson

WSJ.COM: "Hell Hath No Fury Like a Dissatisfied Hogan & Hartson Client":

Have you recently been represented by the law firm of Hogan & Hartson?

Were you expecting that your case would have the representation of a senior partner, but you found that your representation was handled by a less experienced junior member of the firm?

Do you believe this was detrimental to the outcome of your case?

We want to hear from you!

General Steel sued its former law firm Hogan & Hartson alleging breach of contract and other causes. Hogan & Hartson moved to dismiss General Steel's complaint. During settlement discussions, General Steel threatened to run a 'shock and awe' campaign against it. Hogan brought the pending ad campagin to the attention of the court by moving for an extraordinary hearing in regard to its motion to dismiss.

The hearing apparently had no effect on the campaign, which is now running in, among other places, the NY Times. However the motion papers are an interesting discussion of (1) when the content of settlement discussions can be brought to a court's attention; and (2) the proprietary of a party's speech during a pending proceeding.

November 19, 2007

1 In 14 Chance Of Landing On A Typo-Site?

The anti-virus people, McAfee, have released a report on typo-squatting. Among their conclusions is that a consumer who mis-spells a popular web site URL has a 1 in 14 chance of landing on a typo-squatter site.

The TTAB Means What It Says With Regard To Entering Evidence

TTABlog: "New York Fails to Prove Standing and Priority, TTAB Dismisses"

(')(') <- me rolling my eyes after reading this decision.

Anytime Fitness v. Premier Mortage: Can-Spam and TM Infringement Complaint

Anytime Fitness is a fitness center franchisor. Premiere Mortgage is a Flordia-based mortgage lender. Plaintiff Anytime alleges that Defendant Premiere sent spam to Anytime's franchisees in violation of the CAN-SPAM act. What is interesting is that Plaintiff also alleges trademark infringement, however it is not clear (to me) from the complaint how Premiere Mortgage used the ANYTIME FITNESS mark in its spam.

Anytime Fitness, Inc. v. Premiere Mortgage Capital, Inc., 07-cv-04633-RHK-JSM (D. Minn, Nov 16, 2007)

323,527 U.S. Trademark Applications in FY 2007

USPTO: 2007 Fiscal Year-End Results Demonstrates Trent of Improved Patent and Trademark Quality.

The PTO press release also indicated that the average time for receiving a first office action was 3 months. I silently thought "really?" as I read that. Interesting how fragemented, the trademark filing business is. The largest trademark practice doesn't have 1% of the market.

November 17, 2007

"When Do TV Shows Titles Violate Trademark Law?"

Hollywood Reporter: "When Do TV Show Titles Violate Trademark Law?"

When the choice of title has no artistic relevance to the subject of the show. Sorry, I gave away the ending.

November 16, 2007

DJ Action Over "Beetle"-shaped Toy Car

alex toy car.jpg


Alex Toys sells, among other things, toy cars. VW sent a demand letter alleging that some of its toy cars infringed its trade dress in the VW 'beetle" (VW sells (or licenses) beetle-shaped cars). VW filed a complaint but never served it. Negotiations ensued but didn't lead to resolution. Alex filed an action for a declaration of non-infringement.

Panline USA dba Alex Toys v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellcahft, 07 CIV 10272 (SDNY Nov 13 2007) (without exhibits).

November 15, 2007

Golden Compass Sues Beyond Golden Compass in EDNY

golden compass.jpg

beyondgoldencompass.jpg

Producers of upcoming theatrical movie "Golden Compass" sue producers of DVD entitled "Beyond The Golden Compass" on copyright and trademark grounds. "Beyond the Golden Compass," marketed as a tie-in, promises to:

Unlock the astonishing truths and hidden meanings inside the pages of Philip Pullman's The Golden Compass, the best-selling fantasy novel -- and now major motion picture -- that has captured the imagination of millions worldwide. This cutting edge film examines the secret codes and symbols of Lyra's world -- a parallel universe where each person is guided by their animal daemon and where dark, evil forces lurk behind facades of piousness and beauty. Utilizing the latest CG animation, stunning on-location re-enactments and rare archival footage, Beyond The Golden Compass: The Magic of Philip Pullman also includes revealing interviews with historians and experts as well as an exclusive talk with the author himself.

New Line Cinema v. Koch Entertainment, CV 07 4782 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 15, 2007).

November 14, 2007

Giantceutical Sues Domains By Proxy

Plaintiff owns BIOCALTH trademark. Domains by Proxy customer had been using BIOLAWSUIT.COM for a Chinese language site that seemed to refer to a lawsuit relating to BIOCALTH (archive.org page here), the pages of which allegedly reproduced the BIOCALTH logo (the page is down as of this writing). Domains By Proxy doesn't give up name, Plaintiff sues Domains By Proxy and registrar Go Daddy.

Giantceutical v. Domains By Proxy, CV 07-07309 (JTL) (CD Cal Nov 3 2007)

Haute Diggity Dog (CHEWY VUITON) Affirmed - No Infringement, No Dilution

Text of Fourth Circuit Decision in Louis Vuitton v. Haute Diggity Dog here.

43(b)log commentary here.

Food, Drug and Shirt Administration?

lululemon.jpg

NY Times: "'Seaweed' Clothing Has None, Tests Show":

"One of [Lululemon's] lines is called VitaSea, and the company says it is made with seaweed. The fabric, according to product tags, “releases marine amino acids, minerals and vitamins into the skin upon contact with moisture.”

Lululemon, which has received positive media coverage for its fabrics, also says the VitaSea clothing, made from seaweed fiber supplied by a company called SeaCell, reduces stress and provides anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, hydrating and detoxifying benefits.

There is one problem with its VitaSea claims, however. Some of them may not be true."

. . .

". . . The company . . . prints the company’s “manifesto” on its red shopping bags.

The manifesto includes messages like, “Stress is related to 99% of all illness,” “Friends are more important than money,” and “Coke, Pepsi and all other pops will be known as the cigarettes of the future. Colas are not a substitute for water. They are just another cheap drug made to look great by advertising.”(emphasis added)

November 13, 2007

Tiffany v. eBay Trial Starts Today

WSJ.com Law Blog: Tiffany v. eBay:

"Who is responsible for the policing of counterfeit products on eBay?

If you think that’s an interesting question and you’re here in Gotham, hightail it down to Judge Richard Sullivan’s courtroom in the Southern District where a bench trial gets underway today pitting Tiffany against the online auctioneer. Legal experts say a win for Tiffany could change the way eBay handles its auctions."

Homage?

apple_sony_cybershot_t2.jpg


Not quite sure what the story is behind the similarities in these Apple and Sony ads. Via ""You Thought We Wouldn't Notice."

TROPICANA v TROPICANA

jeffrubytropicana.gif

tropicana.png

Business Courier of Cincinatti: Lawsuit Challenges Ruby on Tropicana Name"

"Bill Yung's Tropicana Entertainment LLC, the owner of the Tropicana hotel and casino chain and its Las Vegas flagship, has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Jeff Ruby Culinary Entertainment Inc.

Tropicana Entertainment contends that Ruby's use of the Tropicana name and trade dress at his Tropicana restaurant in Newport infringes on its trademark, which its predecessor registered for hotel and restaurant services in 1989."

November 11, 2007

Hartford Sues Registar Moniker Over Domain Name

hartford_stag_lrg.jpg

After domain name registrar refused to disclose the identity of the registrant of InstitutionalHartfordLife.com, Hartford Life sued Moniker in the Southern District last week. Via Justia.com docket search. Hartford Fire Insurance, et. al. v. Moniker Online Services, LLC and John Does 1-10, 0 Civ 9729 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 2 2007).

One Laptop Per Child Program Begins Monday

olpc xo laptop.jpg

Look at the One Laptop Per Child Program website which describes the creation of the $200 'developing world' laptop, designed to bring connectivity to children around the world. The limited time 'Give One Get One' program begins Monday.

November 09, 2007

"Facebook Faces Legal Questions Over 'Facebook Ads'"

WSJ.com: "Facebook Faces Legal Questions Over 'Facebook Ads'":

"On their respective blogs . . . GWU Law professor Dan Solove and Minnesota Law professor William McGeveran have issues with the new program. McGeveran points out that this may be illegal under a 100-year-old New York privacy law. The statute says that “any person whose name, portrait, picture, or voice is used within this state for advertising purposes or for the purposes of trade without the written consent first obtained” can sue for damages. What’s more, such a use is a criminal misdemeanor."

November 03, 2007

Harry Potter and the Unauthorized Derivative Work

Defendant publishes Harry Potter reference work, based in part on a fan encyclopedia. Harry Potter publisher and author sue.

Text of complaint in Warner Bros Ent and JK Rowling v RDR Books, SDNY Oct 31 2007.

Text of decision referred to in complaint: Castle Rock Entertainment v Carol Publishing, 150 F.3d 132 (2d Cir 1998) (Seinfeld trivia book).

Prof Patry raises fair use questions re suit.

November 01, 2007

HuLu Not In UGC; LuLu Loses Prelim

Lulu assists in self-publishing content, including user-generated content (UGC) in video form. Hulu is the much-discussed joint venture between NBC and Fox that will distribute video content online. The venture had filed a trademark application covering a broad array of services, that could include the distribution of video UGC. Additionally, Hulu has sometimes been described as a potential competitor of YouTube, and that may give rise to the perception that Hulu would distribute UGC.

Lulu filed a trademark suit, alleging that LULU and HULU were confusingly similar, and brought a preliminary injunction motion, arguing that, with its massive resources, were Hulu to enter the UGC field, it would cause irreparable harm to Lulu's fledgling business.

However, under a sealed record, Hulu provided evidence that it will, at least for now, stick to distibuting Network-fare, and not UGC. The identification of other services in its trademark application would not support a finding of that HuLu was about to become a direct competitor of plaintiff. As HuLu was not a direct competitor, there was no finding of imminet irrelarable harm to justify urgent relief. The judge noted that were Hulu to move into UGC, then the court would reevaluate at that time.

Lulu v. N-F Newsite, LLC, 5:07-CV-347-D (EDNC Oct 19 2007) (copy upon request).