by Matt Massari
It may make business sense to put ownership of related trademarks in different subsidiaries. Under In re Wella A.G., 787 F.2d 1549, 229 USPQ 274 (Fed. Cir. 1986), one can generally register similar marks owned by affiliated companies, as long as it’s done properly under the requirements of the Trademark Act. Continue Reading Affiliated Companies and Likelihood of Confusion
On November 24, 2010, the Ninth Circuit announced its decision in FreecycleSunnvale v. The Freecycle Network, a case involving the naked licensing defense to trademark infringement. FreecycleSunnyvale is a member group of The Freecycle Network, an organization devoted to facilitating recycling. The Freecycle Network was formed in March 2003 as an Arizona non-profit corporation dedicated to “free cycling,” which is “the practice of giving an unwanted item to a stranger so that it can continue to be used for its intended purpose rather than disposing of it.” The Freecycle Network maintains its own website and provides a directory of member groups as well as resources for volunteers to create new groups. It’s website also includes a section of etiquette guidelines for its member groups.Continue Reading Naked Licensing and the Freecycle Case
In early November, 2010 Nintendo of America filed a trademark registration application for the mark ITS ON LIKE DONKEY KONG for, among other items, video games. Nintendo filed its mark on an intent to use basis in preparation for the launch of its video game, Donkey Kong Country Returns, for the Wii game system. The fact that Nintendo filed a trademark registration application for the upcoming release of a video game is not necessarily newsworthy. The interesting thing about Nintendo’s application is that the mark is a phrase that has become well entrenched in the common lexicon. This raises the question, will the common use of the phrase have an effect on Nintendo’s ability to register the mark?Continue Reading Can It Still Be On Like Donkey Kong.
By: Jeff Pietsch
Trademark infringement occurs when a third party uses a mark in a way that infringes upon a trademark owner’s exclusive right and use of a trademark. Often, the third party will use a similar mark in a way that confuses consumers as to the source of the goods and services. For example, a fast food restaurant named “Wendi’s” would likely cause confusion with “Wendy’s.” Trademark infringement can occur only when it is likely that consumers will be confused as to the source of the goods. The purpose of this article is to examine the test and factors that courts use to determine if such infringement exists.Continue Reading Trademark Infringement: Factors Considered in Consumer Confusion
By: Matthew G. Massari
Ten years ago, Rick Norsigian visited a garage sale in Fresno, California, and bought a box of sixty-five photographic negatives for $45. Norsigian claims to have noticed that the negatives resembled Ansel Adams’ Yosemite National Park photos. He hired an attorney to assemble a team of experts to authenticate the negatives. In a July 21, 2010 press release and a July 27, 2010 press conference, Norsigian and his lawyer proclaimed that the team of experts had analyzed the negatives for six months and concluded that the photos were created by iconic American photographer Ansel Adams "beyond a reasonable doubt." The “expert report,” which at the time of this writing is available on the website located at www.ricknorsigian.com, prominently features Ansel Adams’ name and trademark. Claiming that the collection is “the lost work of Ansel Adams” from the 1920s or 1930s, Norsigian is now offering for sale prints and posters made from the images for $1,500 to $7,500. Continue Reading Ansel Adams and Trademark Fair Use
By 