Crossroads Between Free Speech and Trademarks
Over the summer, the Supreme Court announced it will take up a trademark case to determine whether the application of Section 2(c) of the Lanham Act to political figures is violative of the First Amendment.
<em>Cosmic Crusaders LLC v. Andrusiek</em>
The Federal Circuit Court ruled in favor of affirming the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in their decision that Andrusiek had sufficient prior use of the same mark that Cosmic Crusaders had registered, thus cancelling Cosmic Crusaders’ registration
<em>Bad Elf, LLC v. Flex Ltd.</em>
The Federal Circuit determined that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) erred in its likelihood of confusion analysis and remanded a case to reconsider its application of the conceptual and commercial strength DuPont Factor in light of Spireon.
VR Legal Developments Shot Down a Peg After EUIPO Trademark Denial
Virtual reality (VR) developments over the past few years have sparked legal wonder, with many questions still lingering. How does the law apply in virtual communities? The European Union Intellectual Property Office’s recent decision sheds some light on the legal criteria of trademarks in VR.
Dunkin’ v. Vapin
Dunkin filed a suit against an e-cigarette company’ for infringing Dunkin’s trademark. Dunkin’ asserts that the e-cigarette company “Vapin” essentially took Dunkin’s style and color from their trademark and replaced the word “Dunkin’” to “Vapin.” This case has the potential to help show a clear case of what the likelihood of confusion analysis of trademark infringement looks like.
The Queens of Christmas: Elizabeth Chan, Darlene Love, and Mariah Carey
“All I Want for Christmas Is You” hitting the airwaves again, but the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decided Mariah Carey cannot have the trademark “Queen of Christmas.”
Can Consumer Products be Expressive Works?
Exploring the Ninth Circuit’s unprecedented broadening of the Rogers test as a heightened standard for determining trademark infringement of expressive works and the potential implications of Supreme Court review of VIP Products LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. in March 2023.