Remove 2002 Remove Branding Remove Brands Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

Hotels, Ice Cream, and Shoes as Canvases for Great Brands

DuetsBlog

Hotels, Ice Cream, and Shoes as Canvases for Great Brands. . Seth Godin has written about how Nike is a great brand because we can imagine what a Nike hotel would look like. . Speaking of ice cream, Ben & Jerry’s is another great brand , like Nike. . How about another test of brand strength? . sneakerheads.

article thumbnail

Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc, No. 2022-1147 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2023)

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Background Amgen produces and markets apremilast, a medication for the treatment of certain types of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, under the brand name Otezla. Sandoz submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) seeking approval to market a generic version of apremilast. Holding(s) No.

Art 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Evaluating the efficacy of Competition Commission Amendment Act, 2023

IP and Legal Filings

Introduction Incorporating a novel focus on the digital market environment, the Competition Amendment Act, 2023 stands out as one of the most momentous changes made to the Competition Act of 2002 in the last two decades. The modifications intend to modify the 2002 Competition Act. This promotes transparency and teamwork.

article thumbnail

Monster Energy Co. Sues Fitness Company for Alleged Trademark Infringement

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

Hammond, Indiana – Monster Energy Company (“Monster”), the Plaintiff, claims to be a nationwide leader in marketing and selling ready-to-drink beverages. Apparently, Monster launched its MONSTER ENERGY® drink brand including its ® mark (the “Claw Icon”) in 2002. Since 2002, Monster asserts it has spent over $8.5

article thumbnail

Hot Take on the Wavy Baby Decision (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

MSCHF has frequently targeted major brands. 2d 410, 414-415 (SDNY 2002)) that the Supreme Court expressly used to “offer as one last example” of “a case with a striking resemblance” in which the Rogers test was cabined. Unlike the defendant in Jack Daniel’s , MSCHF, at least amongst its relevant consumers, has a valuable brand.

Blogging 112
article thumbnail

Legal Discernment On The Co-Existence Of Similar Trademarks

IP and Legal Filings

To profit on the reputation of another brand, competitors began copying marks or acquiring deceptively similar trade marks with a desire to obtain the goodwill of well-known marks. 1] This empowers an enterprise to market its product effectively and allows consumers to differentiate between products of identical natures or classes.

article thumbnail

Publicity Rights: An analysis of Amitabh Bachchan V. Rajat Nagi & Ors.

Intepat

If the property of a person can be protected, likewise, when a popular celebrity like Amitabh Bachchan faces possible harm regarding his brand, the same can be protected under his right to publicity. Additionally, there are provisions that accord protection to publicity rights under the Constitution of India, and the Competition Act, 2002.