John Welch of Foley Hoag has wrtten a comprehensive article entitled “The TTAB in 2002: Strong Marks, Weak Marks, Phantom Marks, and No Marks at All.”  There is an extensive discussion of dilution cases including CURIOUS GEORGE vs. FURIOUS GEORGE.  There is also an analysis of the ST. JOHN WORTS TORTILLA CHIP case.

Irrelevant link:  Furious George Cross-Country Crime Spree game.  Not the Furious George mentioned above and not authorized, etc.

Warwick Rothnie, who wears a horsehair wig because he’s an Australian barrister, reports what he describes as a “reasoned decision finding that cybersquatting breaches our laws on unfair competition but is probably not trademark infringement.” 

Harshest comment made about the defendant: “[Defendant] clearly has no regard for the turth.”

Runner-up: “[Defendant]  has a law degree. He is not in the normal case of a self represented litigant who might have no knowledge of the law, albeit that his knowledge of the law might strike one as rather slight for one who holds himself out as an expert in intellectual property.”

Things you learn reading trademark cases: Plaintiff, CSR Sugar, produces 4% of the world’s sugar.

CSR Limited v. Resource Capital Australia Pty Ltd, [2003] FCA 279 (4 April 2003)

The Fourth Circuit has reversed the lower court  in the Barcelona.com case.  The District Court had held that the owner of a Spanish national trademark registration could invoke the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act.  In contrast, the Fourth Circuit held today that “It requires little discussion that this use of Spanish law by the district court was erroneous under the terms of the statute.”

Barcelona.com, Inc. v. Excelentisimo Ayuntamiento de Barcelona, No. 02-1396 (4th Cir. June 2, 2003).

The Supreme Court held today, 8-0, that the Lanham Act, simply put, does not prevent the uncredited copying of a public domain work.

Dastar v. Twentieth Century Fox, no. 02-428 (June 2, 2003).

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.

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. 

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).

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