The body of law drawn from the precedents set by earlier decisions.
Manufacturer of “Mystic Tan” machines failed to show consumers were likely to be confused by salon’s use of its own solution in Mystic Tan booths. The federal district court in Akron, Ohio, did not err in finding that a manufacturer of tanning booths under the mark “Mystic Tan” failed to show a likelihood of success…
In a case of first impression, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Madrid Protocol gave a European company priority of right in a trademark even without prior use in commerce. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the California district court that Bacardi’s use of BACARDI UNTAMEABLE for rum did not as a matter of law infringe…
This decision by the High Court – Lavinia Deborah Osbourne v (1) Individuals Unknown (2) Ozone Networks Inc. – has now confirmed that NFTs should be considered property. The facts of this case are that Ms. Osbourne’s MetaMask wallet was used without her knowledge or permission and two NFTs representing digital pieces of art were…
Primo July we published an article about the Advocate General’s opinion on the use of protected designations of origin (PDO) for export to third countries. Read the article here. With the recent judgment from European Court of Justice (ECJ) in case C-159/20, it is established that the opinion has been followed in its substance. The…
Like the previously invalidated bar on “disparaging” marks, the “immoral/scandalous” marks prohibition violated the First Amendment as a viewpoint-based restriction on free speech. The Lanham Act’s prohibition against registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks violates the First Amendment as a viewpoint-based restriction on expression, the U.S. Supreme Court has held. A divided Court affirmed a…
Readers might recall an earlier article (see here) discussing the positions of the General Court (GC) and the EUIPO’s Boards of Appeal (BoA) regarding (dis)similarity between alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages. By way of a…
In case you are engaged in a “hot dispute” in this hot summer, so as to “cool-off” a bit, this is to start a discussion about settlement options for pending litigation. [A lawsuit taking a good long snooze …] A recent decision of the Austrian Supreme Court (short “OGH”) dealt with the procedural…
Let us start this article by asking two questions – would you be confused by a take-away Chinese and a posh Chinese restaurant in central London even if they share the same name? Will you convince yourself that a Mayfair Chinese restaurant has opened a branch in your small village and offers late-night take away?…
The LEHMAN BROTHERS mark has been used continuously in the course of winding up the affairs of at least one Lehman Brothers affiliated company. In a case involving competing applications to register the mark LEHMAN BROTHERS, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal…
Yet another Feta case has reached the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This time the question is whether the Kingdom of Denmark is obliged to stop Danish cheese producers from using the protected designation of origin (PDO) Feta for cheese exported to third countries. Historically production and export of cheese under the name Feta existed…
