Articles Posted in Uncategorized

“If you want to motivate people, don’t talk about death!” So said Rocky the Rhode Island Red in the movie Chicken Run, which these guys apparently missed:

This is another Madrid Protocol US registration issued to Frozenbyte, Inc., of Helsinki, Finland. Those Finns must be a fun bunch… What do you sell under this cheerful mark?

“Video disks and video tapes with recorded animated cartoons; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; calculating machines, data processing equipment … blank compact discs with read-only memory for sound or video recording; DVDs and audio digital tapes featuring animated cartoons; computer game programs and software; computer memories; computer operating programs, recorded; computer peripheral devices; recorded computer programs for use in creating computer games, fantasy games, animated cartoons; downloadable computer programs for use in creating computer games, fantasy games, animated cartoons; recorded computer software for use in creating computer games, fantasy games, animated cartoons; disk drives for computers; blank magnetic disks; downloadable image files containing cartoons and fantasy images; downloadable music files; downloadable ring tones for mobile phones; blank record disks; magnetic data media, namely, blank audio tapes; mechanism for coin operated apparatus; fantasy games, animated cartoons; computer mouse; mouse pads; blank optical data carriers; blank optical discs; simulators for the steering and control of vehicles; blank USB flash drives; blank video cassettes; video game cartridges; video game programs; video game software; wrist rests for use with computers; computer game programs for gaming machines, namely, slot machines and video lottery terminals …

It’s usually interesting when a trademark case makes the news, and the court decision released on Tuesday this week is no exception.　 The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a provision of the U.S. trademark statute (known as the Lanham Act) is unconstitutional. Specifically, the court struck down the section of the Act that allows the Trademark Office to deny registration to a trademark that it considers to be “scandalous, immoral, or disparaging.”

Nine of the twelve judges on the court signed an opinion which begins about as strongly as an opinion can:

It is generally a good idea to watch for infringing uses of your trademarks, and respond when you find them. Failure to police infringing uses can result in your mark losing its ability to distinguish between providers. In the extreme case, it can become a generic term — that’s what happened to one-time trademarks like ELEVATOR and ASPIRIN.

Smart trademark owners know this, and have a program in place to watch for potentially infringing uses. It is easy enough to search through applications at the Trademark Office, or to look through the Trademark Official Gazette for potentially infringing uses that have already been approved by the Office’s examiners. In the last 20 years, search engines like Google and Yahoo! have become critical means of finding the infringing users, especially the ones who may not have filed for a trademark registration. A company with an online presence has a worldwide presence, and in the internet age an infringer doesn’t have to be next door to hurt your business.

It is also becoming increasingly important to watch domain name registrations, especially since hundreds of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) started going active in 2014. Everyone is familiar with the traditional gTLDs, such as .com, .net, and .org. There were 23 gTLDs in 2013. By the end of 2014, the powers that be in the internet had approved more than 750 new gTLDs, and they are expected to approve hundred more in the next year or two. These include hundred tied to specific brands, like .sony, .dell, .target, and .netflix. There are many more that are more generic in their focus, such as .baby, .family,　 .adult, .sucks, and .mobile.

For years, the auto industry has used copyright law and anti-hacking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 to stop hotrodders from hacking into the software that controls modern cars. That is about to change, thanks to exemptions from the DMCA which were approved last week by the U.S. Copyright Office. Under the exemptions, car buffs and researchers will be able to break into and, to some extent, modify the software that controls cars without violating the law.　 Whether doing so will void the warranty will probably still depend on the automakers.

Pure coincidence, I’m sure: Both of these marks appeared in last week’s Gazette. I’d like to see their stores sitting next door to each other in a mall in Colorado.

(Smoke It All: International Class 1 for chemicals for smoking food; I.C. 4 for wood dust for smoking food; I.C. 35 for retail store services. Smoke It All A/S, Esbjerg, Denmark. Mary Wanna: International Class 32 for fruit juices, energy drinks, soft drinks, and soda water. M&W Brands and Products, Inc., East Bradenton, Florida.)

A lot of what I do in this field involves helping people figure out what they need. “Intellectual property” is a fairly broad topic with a lot of different kinds of rights lumped together in a way that can lead to confusion. I have had people tell me they want to file a trademark on the copyright for their patent. If that’s you, call me and make an appointment. The initial consultation is free. I may end up referring you to a patent lawyer to prepare and file a patent application, but we may figure out that you need to register a copyright, or have an investor sign a non-disclosure agreement, or send a cease-and-desist letter to an infringer. We won’t know until we talk.

For instance, suppose you had a great idea for an invention. Your first thought may be to pull out a credit card and send a lot of money to one of the invention commercialization companies that advertise on the radio. They will take your money and file a provisional patent application, or maybe a design patent application. Those may not be what you need,　 but these businesses are set up to file applications, not give you trustworthy advice. A provisional patent application merely kicks the can down the road for a year, at the end of which you will need to shell out more money to actually file a full patent application. It may be that you would have been better off keeping your idea secret for a year. A design patent, on the other hand, may be inappropriate for your invention, and may actually cause you to lose your rights in　 your invention — the exact opposite of what a patent is supposed to do. Your money may be better spent elsewhere. A consultation with a lawyer may steer you in the right direction.

(Disclaimer: I am not a patent lawyer. I cannot file patents, I will not do a patent search, and I will not advise you whether or not an invention is patentable.)

I think this guy has too many oars in the water: Published for registration under the Madrid Protocol to owner Francesco Cirillo of Berlin, Germany:

First, there’s nothing that draws customers like the sound of a screaming toddler or a college student who has stepped out of his safe place. But what the heck is he trying to sell with this mark? According to his application he is using the mark for:

“Recorded content… featuring music and animation; … audiovisual receivers; magnets, magnetizers and demagnetizers for magnetic tapes; … electrical integrated control systems for use in the field of waste water treatment, information management and communications; apparatus, instruments in the nature of electricity conduits and cables for electricity; optical devices, enhancers and correctors, namely, optical lenses; safety, security, protection and signally devices, namely, cables for optical signal transmission; diving equipment, namely, helmets; navigation, guidance, tracking, targeting and map making devices, namely, global positioning systems; measuring, detecting and monitoring instruments, indicators and controllers, namely, computer hardware; scientific research and laboratory apparatus, educational apparatus and simulators, namely, electronic clinicians training simulators; and parts and fittings for all the aforementioned goods…”

The Idaho State Journal ran this AP article on Wednesday, December 2, about trademark infringement litigation between the San Diego Comic-Con and the Salt Lake Comic Con. The Associated Press (probably actually a reporter for one of the Salt Lake papers) notes that the parties appear close to a settlement of the lawsuit, but it is a little confused about the legalities.

4The San Diego Comic-Con has run conventions in California for years, while Dan Farr Productions of Draper, Utah has run the Salt Lake Comic Con since 2013. More than 120,000 people attended the SLCC this year, in spite of a trademark infringement suit filed last year by the San Diego group in 2014.

The San Diego group (SDCC) has a number of registered trademarks, including the design mark

File under “should have been rejected as merely descriptive.” Approved and published last week for registration in International Class 37 for bee control and removal services:

Yes, Crazy Bee Man LLC of Hialeah, Florida, yes you are, because by definition anyone in the bee removal business must be. You are no doubt the man for the job.

TRADEMARK OF THE DAY

There’s a lot to be learned about the legal and the business ends of the trademark and marketing business by studying what gets approved and used as marks. There is also a lot to be learned about life in this world. Since I flip through the Trademark Official Gazette every week anyway — that’s where all the newly-approved trademarks get published — I thought I’d use this space to share a few gems that I come across.

I don’t think they quite get the point of this business: Both of these marks appeared in last week’s Gazette, approved for registration in International Class 25 for wide ranges of women’s clothing: