If you met me at INTA, I handed you my firm’s business card which uses lenticular printing to depict “the motion of an apple falling from a stylized tree design, until the apple hits the ground at the right edge of the shadow under the tree.” Apple – Newton – IP law – get it?
MISTER SOFTEE v MASTER SOFTEE
Mister Softee wins prelim injunction against former franchisee.
mister softee v master softee.pdf
var docstoc_docid=’171112564′; var docstoc_title=’mister softee v master softee.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’mister softee v master softee.pdf’;
BULL SMOKE v VAPOR BULL
The vape/e-cig market is producing two or three trademark cases a week. Here, the owner of BULL SMOKE sues VAPOR BULL. But what of BULL DURHAM?
bull smoke v vapor bull complaint.pdf
var docstoc_docid=’171111160′; var docstoc_title=’bull smoke v vapor bull complaint.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’bull smoke v vapor bull complaint.pdf’;
RUFFLEBUTTS v RUFFLE BUNS
huh. Plaintiff owns an incontestable registration for RUFFLEBUTTS for children’s apparel. It spots a suspicious order by defendant, who (allegedly) indicates that it is seeking to copy plaintiff’s business (see Complaint paras 21 to 28). Plaintiff’s RUFFLEBUTT product illustrated on top, defendant’s RUFFLE BUNS below it. I don’t know what the market looks like, but
Another Copyright Decision About Dragons
var docstoc_docid=’170998580′; var docstoc_title=’eng dragon copyright.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’eng dragon copyright.pdf’;
ALL IN v ALL IN (Dallas Mavericks)
Apparel manufacturer owning registration for ALL IN sues Dallas Mavericks.
mavericks all in complaint.pdf
var docstoc_docid=’170997601′; var docstoc_title=’mavericks all in complaint.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’mavericks all in complaint.pdf’;
I’m Telling You, A Lot Of Hookah Cases
StarBuzz seeks declaration that its CITRUS MIST tobacco for hookahs (and e-cigs) doesn’t infringe Hershey’s CITRUS MIST mark used for breath-savers.
starbuzz v hershey citrus mist.pdf
var docstoc_docid=’170937010′; var docstoc_title=’starbuzz v hershey citrus mist.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’starbuzz v hershey citrus mist.pdf’;
INTA Amicus Brief re LADY GAGA brand Recorded Music in Japan
INTA amicus brief on whether LADY GAGA is registrable as a trademark for class 9 recorded music, in Japan.
inta lady gaga descriptiveness brief.pdf
var docstoc_docid=’170869267′; var docstoc_title=’inta lady gaga descriptiveness brief.pdf’; var docstoc_urltitle=’inta lady gaga descriptiveness brief.pdf’;
No Reverse Dilution by Nike in FUELBAND Case
NB: This decision is dated March 20. Plaintiff has now withdrawn its case.
This is a somewhat typical fact pattern – a small company owns a not-so-unique mark. A large company appends its famous housemark to the weaker term.
Plaintiff here owns a federal registration for FUEL for apparel. It has had a low
What Is The Argument For Single Class Application Jurisdictions?
Does anyone want to point to the best argument why a trademark office should accept only single class applications? Seems to needlessly drive up expenses in most instances.