Businesses at home and abroad are becoming more and more aware of the value and benefits of a U.S. trademark registration. Unfortunately, along with the historic surge of new trademark filings over the past year (see our blog on the surge), the USPTO has also seen an increase in suspicious submissions ranging from inaccurate to fraudulent.
The names of the twin pandas at Ueno Zoological Park in Tokyo have been decided as “Xiao Xiao” and “Reirei”, and they will be open to the public in January 2022.
THE INTELLECTUAL Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) said it is adopting the European Union’s (EU) goods and services trademark classification system to improve the business trademark application process in the Philippines.
A potentially important product design trademark case is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court involving those chocolate covered bready-sticks. Ezaki Glico Kabushiki Kaisha v. Lotte International America Corp., Docket No. 20-1817 (Supreme Court 2021).
Ezaki Gliko Kabushiki Kaisha v. Lotte International America Co, No. 19-3010 (3d Cir. 2021)
ポッキー「いつかさそおう、を今日さそおう。」篇 有村架純、0:30
ペペロ(韓国のポッキー) CM集 【EXO】【KARA】 KOREAN EATING COMMERCIAL, 3:23
ペペロ(韓国のポッキー) CM集 【EXO】【KARA】 KOREAN EATING COMMERCIAL
(added 2021.8.5) Biscuit sticks functional issue
On July 29, several IP organizations and one global snack conglomerate filed amicus briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court asking the nation’s highest court to grant a petition for writ of certiorari to take up Ezaki Glico Kabushiki Kaisha v. Lotte International America Corp.
The golden shade of the wrapping used by Swiss chocolate maker Lindt & Sprüngli for its bunnies has trademark protection, a top German court has ruled.The company had earlier taken a German chocolate maker, Heilemann, to court after it also started selling bunnies in gold wrapping in 2018.
The trademark complaint that Nike filed against Customs By Ilene, Inc., dba Drip Creationz is not the only customization-centric lawsuit that it filed this week. Also on Monday, Nike named Jeffrey Waskowiak and KickRich LLC in a similar – but unrelated – suit, accusing them of trademark infringement and dilution in connection with their alleged practice of “reselling Nike and Converse products that have been materially altered in ways that the brands have never approved or authorized,” and thereby, robbing Nike and Nike-owned Converse of their ability to “carefully manage which brands to collaborate with and thoughtfully select where, when, and how often their marks are used to guide the public perception for their iconic brands.”