IP/Brand Protection

Subscribe to IP/Brand Protection
colorful leather handbags for sale

Last month, Senators Christopher Coons (D-Del.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), introduced a resolution designating July as “National Anti-Counterfeiting and Consumer Education and Awareness Month” (S. Res. 736). As counterfeits flood the market, totaling almost $3 billion in estimated retail value in 2023 alone, the resolution aims to increase anti-counterfeiting awareness for consumers and businesses alike.

In 2023, the United States seized over 23 million counterfeit goods, with an estimated retail value of $2.76 billion—nearly double the reported amount and value from 2020. Many things have contributed to this increase, including the continued expansion of e-commerce and a lack of consumer awareness.Continue Reading Keepin’ it Real: It’s National Anti-Counterfeiting Month

webimage-A3D60782-78F0-4713-90709CC6D47843E2

Considering Use in Commerce, Source-Identifying-Function, and Conduct vs. Confusion

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court vacated the 10thCircuit’s decision in Abitron Austria GmbH et al. v. Hetronic International Inc. (“Hetronic”). The Supreme Court principally held that the Lanham Act does not have extraterritorial application. As Crowell previously discussed, the Supreme Court sought briefing on Hetronic from the U.S. Solicitor General, signaling an interest in addressing the Tenth Circuit’s decision, the extraterritoriality of the Lanham Act, and the complex circuit split that has at least three distinct tests. Although the Court agreed 9-0 that the lower court’s decision should be vacated, Justice Alito’s majority opinion and Justice Sotomayor’s concurring opinion disagreed on the second step of the extraterritoriality test, specifically regarding whether foreign conduct can have domestic implications. The majority disagreed with both the Tenth Circuit and the Solicitor General, concluding that the Lanham Act cannot apply to foreign defendants’ foreign conduct.Continue Reading The Unanimous, but Contentiously Fractured, Supreme Court Decision on Extraterritoriality of the Lanham Act

Taco

It seems most everyone has been closely monitoring Taco Bell’s cancellation proceedings directed to federal trademark registrations covering the TACO TUESDAY trademark.  On July 15, 2023, one of the registrants, Spicy Seasonings, LLC, withdrew its registration after decades of ownership, supporting Taco Bell’s allegations that the phrase is generic and therefore not protectable as a trademark.Continue Reading Something to Taco-Bout: Taco Bell Takes on TACO TUESDAY Trademark Registrations

Businessman touching the brain working of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the futuristic business and coding software development on interface and synchronize network connection, IoT, innovative and technology of business.

Ever since the public launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, the world has been gasping at the astonishing accomplishments of this generative AI chatbot:  a simple “prompt” in the form of a question (“which are the most important decisions of the CJEU in copyright?”) will receive a credible response within seconds (“The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued several important decisions in the field of copyright law. While it is challenging to determine a definitive list of the most important decisions, here are some key rulings that have had significant impact” and it goes on to list some of the CJEU’s most well know decisions, such as Infopaq, UsedSoft, Svensson, Deckmyn, ACI Adam, GS Media and YouTube).Continue Reading AI-Powered Chatbots: Mythical Super Creature or Legal Trojan Horse

luxury-g199709300_640

While fashion lovers throughout the European Union will surely be familiar with the pattern, the General Court held that luxury fashion house Louis Vuitton failed to demonstrate that its trademark checkerboard ‘Damier Azur’ pattern, had acquired distinctiveness through use throughout the European Union.Continue Reading If Louis Vuitton Cannot Prove Acquired Distinctiveness, Can You? Checking In After the Louis Vuitton ‘Damier Azur’ Case

Meta Birkin

The global fashion marketplace is experiencing unprecedented digital transformation with the emergence of the metaverse and NFTs. Given implementation is still in its early stages, fashion brands have closely watched the Hermès vs. Rothschild “MetaBirkins” dispute as a case that has the power to help define the future boundaries for what constitutes trademark infringement in the metaverse.Continue Reading A victory for Hermès in the bag: How the “MetaBirkins” verdict may pave the landscape for the future of fashion and the metaverse

Summary: In a recent “Law.com” article titled “Too Big to Succeed: Lessons from the Ye / Adidas Brand Partnership,” Crowell attorneys discuss the unraveling of Ye (Kanye) West’s brand partnerships; particularly with Adidas. In the article, they explore Ye’s partnership deal, how the deal was likely terminated, and what brands need to know to manage…

I. Introduction

In recent news it was reported that Ikea, a globally well-known furniture company, sent a cease and desist letter to the gaming studio Ziggy following the announced release by the latter of a video game called “The store is closed”. The video game is still in development, but it has been characterized as a survival horror game set in an Ikea-like furniture store called “STYR”. The idea of the video game is to explore, craft weapons, build fortifications and try to survive the night in the furniture store.

Although the video game is unreleased, Ikea discovered that the gaming studio Ziggy was raising funds through a Kickstarter campaign. In total Ziggy was able to already raise several tens of thousands of dollars in a short period of time. From its discovery, Ikea immediately sent a cease and desist letter demanding certain changes as the “game uses a blue and yellow sign with a Scandinavian name on the store, a blue box-like building, yellow vertical stiped shirts identical to those worn by IKEA personnel, a gray path on the floor, furniture that looks like IKEA furniture, and product signage that looks like IKEA signage. All the foregoing immediately suggest that the game takes place in an IKEA store”. Continue Reading Ikea’s Battle Against Horror Games: The Importance of Intellectual Property Rights

In the past several years, the market for counterfeit goods has grown rampantly. Estimates of the total value of counterfeit goods sold each year range from $1.7 trillion to $4.5 trillion. Makers of luxury goods are among the hardest-hit industries, as well as those dealing in footwear, apparel, fine art, and collectables. The rise of online shopping has further thwarted companies’ ability to protect their brands. Illegitimate sellers on e-commerce marketplaces employ techniques like posting fake positive reviews and using copyrighted branding to reach consumers and sell counterfeit goods.      Continue Reading Anti-Counterfeit Measures Help Brands Protect Against the Trafficking of Fake Products

On November 21, 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed—after passing on the issue once before—to hear Jack Daniel’s (JDPI) challenge to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in VIP Prods. LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Props, where the Ninth Circuit affirmed without opinion the district court’s grant of summary judgment to VIP and the dismissal of JDPI’s trademark infringement claim,[1] on the grounds that JDPI could not satisfy either prong of the Rogers test. The Rogers test balances free expression under the First Amendment against the trademark protections of the Lanham Act. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on the questions of whether parody uses of another’s mark receive First Amendment protection from liability under the Lanham Act and whether parody is exempt from claims of dilution by tarnishment under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(3)(C). The decision could clarify the balance between trademark and the First Amendment, an issue that has long-confounded practitioners.Continue Reading More Bark or Bite? U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Whether the First Amendment Has the Teeth to Protect Whiskey Bottle Shaped Dog Toy Maker from Jack Daniel’s Lanham Act Claims