In a long-running trademark dispute between two companies marketing real-estate development services, and both using the name Dewberry, a trial court held that Dewberry Group entities infringed the “Dewberry” marks of Dewberry Engineers. The problem is that when the time came for assessing damages,
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide a $43 million dispute between two real estate developers – one in Virginia and one in Georgia – over the rights to the “Dewberry” name in a case exploring when courts can award a company’s profits as a remedy for trademark infringement.
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a political activist’s attempt to trademark the phrase “Trump Too Small,” saying the federal trademark office did not violate the First Amendment when it declined to register the mark.
Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jack Daniel’s in a dispute over a humorous squeaky dog toy called “Bad Spaniels.” The Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit to reconsider the trademark infringement and dilution claims, holding that because VIP Products used “Bad Spaniels” as a trademark: (1) the Rogers test for artistic works (discussed below) does not apply; and (2) the noncommercial use exclusion – that exempts parody from dilution – also does not apply.
US Supreme Court will hear a free speech appeal on trademark “Trump Too Small”
The Supreme Court on Monday said it will consider whether a California attorney has a free-speech right to trademark the phrase “Trump Too Small” for use on T-shirts that mock the former president and build on locker-room taunts from the 2016 Republican presidential primary.
A man wants to trademark ‘Trump too small’ for T-shirts. Supreme Court to hear case, 2:56
A man wants to trademark ‘Trump too small’ for T-shirts. Supreme Court to hear case
(2023.6.16追記)
The Supreme Court agreed to review the US Patent & Trademark Office’s (PTO) challenge to a February 2022 ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the ruling at issue, th
The American Bar Association (ABA) filed an amicus brief on February 3 with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the Court to clarify issues related to the application of the Lanham Act to trademark disputes that cross international borders.
(2023.2.16 追記)
The Vanity Fair test, derived from Vanity Fair Mills, Inc. v. T. Eaton Co., 234 F.2d 633 (2d Cir. 1956), considers three factors: (1) whether the defendant is a United States citizen; (2) whether there was a conflict with trademark rights established under the relevant law of the foreign jurisdiction; and (3) whether the defendant’s conduct has a “substantial effect on United States commerce.” Vanity Fair, 234 F.2d at 642. （Extraterritorial TM Disputes）
外国人はVanity Fair testの最初のテスト、United States citizenに該当しないため、Vanity Fair testを採用する裁判管轄であっても問題は生じないことになりそうです。
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a dispute between Jack Daniel’s and a dog toy company that sells “Bad Spaniels” whiskey bottles….. Jack Daniel’s is arguing VIP Products is in violation of federal trademark law and could be confusing shoppers, while VIP Products argues the toy is an “expressive work” under First Amendment protections.
The United States Supreme Court has a new opportunity to look at whether a U.S. trademark owner can recover damages for infringing uses of the owner’s mark occurring outside the United States. … The district court jury returned a verdict to the tune of $90 million, finding that Abitron had willfully infringed the Hetronic mark— even though 97% of the infringing sales were made in Europe. The district court entered a final judgment in line with the jury’s verdict as well as a worldwide permanent injunction.
This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, whether the holder of a U.S. trademark can win damages for trademark infringements in foreign sales, and whether the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure or Civil Procedure govern a wrongful-death case
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.
