I ♡ Trademarks NewsletterIssue #296
Bri Van Til | July 05, 2022
Wait, I’m Confused
A Southern District of New York judge has ruled that Warby Parker’s use of 1-800 Contacts’ trademarks in its advertisements was non-infringing because there was little likelihood of confusion. To learn more about the use of trademarks in comparative advertising, sign up for Alt Legal Connect in February. Use the code “newsletter” for a discount.
Dairy Queen wasn’t able to prove that bottled water brand Blizzard Water was infringing its BLIZZARD trademark.
I don’t think the applicants of “BE THAT SPARK” meant for themselves to be that spark for a trademark opposition, but SparkNotes is claiming likelihood of confusion.
Need some ideas for how to overcome those pesky §2(d) Office Actions? Join us for this webinar in September for some concrete examples.
The Supreme Court has opted not to hear American Axle v. Neapco, a case that many, including the Biden Administration, had hoped would clarify patent eligibility.
This webinar next week is all about suing the USPTO for patent rights.
Step 3: Profit!
Captain Sir Tom Moore’s charity is facing allegations that the deceased British Army officer’s daughter’s company has profited significantly from related trademarks.
The creators of the Bored Ape Yacht Club NFTs are suing an artist for “trolling” them and profiting off their trademarks by producing knockoff NFTs.
Major Lindsey [in] Africa—I read that as one person, not three—is looking for chief IP counsel at Clorox.
I bet Ice Miller is a cool place to be a trademark paralegal.
I’m pretty Shure you’d like a job as senior counsel for this audio tech company.
Does your current job make you Sey(farth)? Consider serving as a trademark attorney for this firm instead.
This part time IP/business law position at DiAngelo Law sounds heavenly.
Have an open role on your team? Send a link to your job listing to email@example.com, and we’ll publish it in our next newsletter.
Odds and Ends
Kim Kardashian is facing yet another obstacle in her pursuit of SKKN.
LEGO of our design, said the toy manufacturer to third parties making the cute little plastic people. They explained, “a trademark cannot simultaneously serve as an exclusive, representative symbol of two different entities.”
This case serves as a warning that once you’ve gotten a cease and desist letter, you can’t seek a declaratory judgement claiming there is not an “actual case or controversy.”
Mandatory trademark identity verification is coming to the USPTO starting next month.
The Copyright Office has just released a report covering press publishers’ copyright protections. Read the report here.