/
Trademark and Copyright Updates Trademark and Copyright Updates

Trademark and Copyright Updates - PowerPoint Presentation

aaron
aaron . @aaron
Follow
383 views
Uploaded On 2018-11-08

Trademark and Copyright Updates - PPT Presentation

July 2015 USPTO TMEP Update July 2015 TBMP Update July 2015 Final rule relating to Changes in Requirements for Collective and Certification Marks Effective June 1 2015 the daily limit per credit card account was lowered to 2499999 ID: 723163

2015 party ttab june party 2015 june ttab product trulicity precedential trademark mark copyright july mfg size owns opposition

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Trademark and Copyright Updates" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Trademark and Copyright Updates

July

2015Slide2

USPTOTMEP Update July 2015TBMP Update July 2015Final rule relating to Changes in Requirements for Collective and Certification

MarksEffective June 1, 2015, the daily limit per credit card account was lowered to $24,999.99. New Exam Guide on Repeating Pattern MarksSlide3

Local Copyright PlaintiffRichard Bell has sued 100’s of people for © infringement for photo of IndyGenerally demands ~$3,000

Sued someone who hadn’t used photo – J. Pratt ordered fees to defendant of $34,000:“The Court is persuaded by Mr. Lantz’s argument that the motivation of Mr. Bell in filing this action appears to be an attempt to extract quick, small settlements from many defendants instead of using the judicial process to protect his copyright against legitimate infringing actors,” Slide4

Distributor Owns TM, not MFGpresumption that, between a mfg. and an exclusive distributor,

the mfg owns mark, but rebuttable: (1) which party created and first affixed the mark to the

product; (2) which party's name appeared with the trademark on packaging and promotional materials; (3) which party maintained the quality and uniformity of the product, including technological changes;

(

4) which party does the consuming public believe

stands

behind the product,

e.g.

, to whom customers

direct

complaints and turn to for correction of defective products;

(

5) which party paid for advertising; and

(

6) what a party represents to others about the source or origin of the product.

UVeritech

, Inc. v. Amax Lighting, Inc.

, Cancellation No. 92057088 (June 29, 2015) [precedential]. Slide5

Don’t Count on VacatingIn 2013 TTAB issued a ruling dismissing opposition to HOUNDSTOOTH MAFIAAppealed to Dt. Ct.

 Settled by assignmentConsent Judgement 1) allow to register and 2) for the TTAB to vacate decisionTTAB REFUSES TO VACATE

D.Ct. can adjudge registerability and can authorize “necessary actions”, but vacating not

necessary

– b/c of assignment, TTAB could allow registration without vacating decision

No finding that decision was wrong

The

Board of Trustees of The University of Alabama and Paul W. Bryant, Jr. v. William Pitts, Jr. and Christopher Blackburn

, Opposition No. 91187103 (June 23, 2015) [precedential]. Slide6

Where’s Waldo? (TRULICITY)Slide7

Where’s Waldo? (TRULICITY)EA refused specimen:the word TRULICITY is in the same size and style of font as the surrounding wording

is not "set out from the surrounding text." have to search even

to find the mark. TTAB Reversed: "a trademark ... need not be displayed in any particular size or degree of prominence." Question is, will it be understood as indicating the origin of the

goods

– yes, especially b/c coined term.

In

re Eli Lilly and Company

, Serial No. 85183667 (June 18, 2015) [not precedential].