. . . even though it’s germane. Playboy has refused to pull its March issue featuring Ms. Alba on the cover (background here). As to Ms. Alba’s argument that the appearance on the cover of Playboy suggests (promises? implies? teases?) that the subject will appear nude or semi-nude (why isn’t it demi-nude?) inside the magazine, Playboy has asserted that ‘celebrities routinely grace the cover without appearing nude inside.’
This seems like a testable proposition if we could define celebrity. But is the prior track record of celebrity covers known to, and does it matter to an optimistic readership?

The Oblon Spivak firm has started the TTAB Rules Blog, the title not being a claim of superiority on behalf of the TTAB, but rather a commentary on the rules package recently proposed by the Board. From the intro:
“. . . The rules package published on January 17, 2006 is quite extensive, some 12 pages in length, and comments to the proposed rules must be filed with the USPTO by March 20, 2006.
The proposed rules are likely to have a serious and negative impact on the ability of trademark owners to solve trademark issues before the Board in a cost-effective manner. We are concerned that the new rules will encourage more trademark owners to resort to the federal courts, as the procedures at the Board will become far more cumbersome, with increased costs to the parties.
We believe that further time is needed to carefully evaluate the impact of the new rules, and former TTAB Judge David Kera appeared before the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC) earlier this week and encouraged the PTO to extend the public comment period, and to hold hearings on the proposed rules. The PTO has not yet decided whether to extend the deadline, or whether to hold public hearings, and we encourage you to request that the Board do so.”