(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Affiliate Marketing vs Retail Services - TTAB's Landmark Ruling
SCOTUS and federal court rulings on TTAB decisions on granting trademarks and trademark renewals; Netflix settling an anticipated defamation case with a disclaimer and donation
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business - How Foreign Companies Can Protect Their IP and Brand in the U.S.
(Podcast) The Briefing: It’s Not Yabba-Dabba-Delicious – TTAB Denies Color Mark for Post Fruity Pebbles!
The Briefing: It’s Not Yabba-Dabba-Delicious – TTAB Denies Color Mark for Post Fruity Pebbles!
8 Key Takeaways | The Presumption of Irreparable Harm After the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020
PODCAST: Paralegal Insights: A Collaborative Trademark Practice, Series 4
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog – No Beating Around the Bush: TTAB Upholds Anti-Pot Policy
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Supreme Court Takes Up Jack Daniel’s-Bad Spaniels Trademark Dispute
Season Three Trailer
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: NBA Star Luka Doncic Goes Hard in the Paint and Seeks to Cancel Mom’s Trademark (Part 1)
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - NBA Star Luka Doncic Goes Hard in the Paint and Seeks to Cancel Mom’s Trademark (Part 1)
JONES DAY TALKS®: Buckeyes Win: Ohio State Secures Trademark for “THE”
5 Key Takeaways | Combating Misrepresentations in Trademark Prosecution and Maintenance
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - THE Ohio State University Registers "The" as a Trademark
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: THE Ohio State University Registers "The" as a Trademark
Trademark lawyers are often asked: “What’s the difference between a trademark and a service mark?” In general, a trademark refers to a brand name used in connection with goods, while a service mark is one that is used in...more
October seems to be the inescapable Taylor Swift’s unofficial month of choice – 17 years after she released her self-titled first album in October 2006, the October 2023 news cycle is buzzing about her “Taylor Swift: The Eras...more
In a precedential decision, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) affirmed the refusal to register the trademark GOD BLESS THE USA for home decor items on the ground...more
As cannabis products become legal in more and more states, commercial interest grows in protecting the trademarks associated with those products. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has maintained its refusal to...more
The General Court of the European Union ruled on December 12 that the Cannabis Store Amsterdam logo was unregistrable as violative of public policy and morality because it would encourage illegal activity. This decision is...more
In a recent decision on remand from the Federal Circuit, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) rejected Petitioner adidas AG’s (“adidas”) claim that Respondent Christian Faith Fellowship Church (“CFFC”) abandoned its...more
The mark must be used “in Commerce” and in good faith in the ordinary course of trade. While the USPTO will generally not conduct an inquiry, the applicant must claim use that qualifies as “Use in U.S. Commerce”. ...more
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board recently affirmed the refusal to register a trademark application for BIG SIX for wine on the ground that the term is generic or descriptive of wines. In re Plata Wine Partners, LLC,...more
Most of us know a great brand when we see one. And when customers develop trust in a brand, they usually remain loyal to that company’s products or services and recommend them to others. ...more
In a precedential decision on August 22 2017, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) in In re General Mills IP Holdings II, LLC (Serial 86757390) held that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support the...more