Softbelly sold SCREENIE BEANIES, bean bag toys with chamois bellies to be used in wiping a computer screens.
Softbelly’s objects to the judge’s having permitted Ty
to present evidence of “Beanie” products that Ty marketed
after “Screenie Beanies” entered the market. Obviously
those products could not be used to show that the “Beanie
Babies” trademark
From the AP:
The History Channel in the United States is now history.
Make that History. The cable network quietly dropped “the” and “channel” from its name recently, claiming History for itself. “Our brand is, in the media landscape, synonymous with the genre of history so I don’t think it’s presumptuous of us to call
Brand New ponders the Camel cigarettes logo and asks “if it’s Turkish, what’s with the pyramids?” Answer: the pyramids refer to the name Camel and not to where the tobacco is from. Of course.
There I was minding my own business. Cottonelle had some sort of sidewalk promotion, utilizing its ‘Be Kind To Your Behind” tagline, when activists stepped in front of the giant Cotonelle golden retriever puppy-mobile, unfurled a banner, and dropped their pants to reveal underwear emblazoned with variants of the Cottonelle tagline, urging that we be
Those of us who heard the Crazy Eddie commercials growing up will be intrigued by this mention by IPKat that someone attempted to auction the name on eBay, asking for $800,000, and getting no bid higher than $30k. Some background here.
News.com: Porn-friendly .xxx domain backer loses suit against federal agencies
The company behind the proposed .xxx top-level domain, which was rejected after the Bush administration intervened, has been trying to dig up embarrassing government documents through a federal lawsuit.
Make that “was trying.” A federal judge on March 12 granted summary judgment to the Bush
I will be hosting an INTA Roundtable on INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES: A TRADEMARK PRACTITIONER’S POINT OF VIEW at the Trademark Blog World Headquarters, also known as the offices of Moses & Singer, in the Chrysler Buidling in midtown Manhattan, April 14. Register through INTA. Attendance is limited. Discussion outline here.
Phat Fashions LLC v. Victoria’s Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc.
By New York Southern District Court
New York Southern District Court
– Trademark
Filed: March 14, 2008
Plaintiff: Phat Fashions LLC, Phat Fashions LLC, Phat Fashions LLC Defendant: Victoria’s Secret Stores Brand Management, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2008cv02745
document.write(”);
The Legal Satyricon: “Is GoDaddy A Mass Cybersquatter?“:
These pay-per-click pages and their operators are the parasites of the internet. I love when they put some goddamned phrase at the top like “find something interesting” or “helping you find what you need.”
Far from “helping you find what you need,” these sites do
HuffingtonPost comments on MPAA Chairman Dan Glickman’s remarks reproduced below.
document.write(”);
var scribd_doc = new scribd.Document(2297036, ‘key-eie5swjmaf09k9obnro’); scribd_doc.addParam(‘height’, 500); scribd_doc.addParam(‘width’, 450); scribd_doc.addParam(‘page’, 1); scribd_doc.write(’embedded_flash_2297036_61fu1′);