Intellectual Property Law Blog

JUNE 16, 2023

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that a trademark claim concerning “a squeaky, chewable dog toy designed to look like a bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey” which, as a play on words, turns the words “Jack Daniels” into “Bad Spaniels” and the descriptive phrase “Old No. 1125(c)(3)(A).

Fair Use 130

Fair Use Trademark Cease and Desist Designs 130

LexBlog IP

JUNE 16, 2023

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that a trademark claim concerning “a squeaky, chewable dog toy designed to look like a bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey” which, as a play on words, turns the words “Jack Daniels” into “Bad Spaniels” and the descriptive phrase “Old No.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Cease and Desist Trademark Designs 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 16, 2023

On June 8, 2023, the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that a trademark claim concerning “a squeaky, chewable dog toy designed to look like a bottle of Jack Daniels whiskey” which, as a play on words, turns the words “Jack Daniels” into “Bad Spaniels” and the descriptive phrase “Old No.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Cease and Desist Trademark Designs 52

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

DECEMBER 11, 2023

MSCHF has frequently targeted major brands. Every commercial parodist trades on the goodwill of the famous trademark it mocks. 2007)) and the “ My Other Bag ” tote bag (Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. Unlike the defendant in Jack Daniel’s , MSCHF, at least amongst its relevant consumers, has a valuable brand. 3d 425 (S.D.N.Y

Blogging 111

Blogging Trademark Branding Brands 111

LexBlog IP

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

The level of attention of the average consumer, deemed to be reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect, is likely to vary according to the category of goods or services in question (judgment of 10 October 2007, Bang & Olufsen v OHIM (Shape of a loudspeaker ), T‑460/05, EU:T:2007:304, paragraph 32).

Trademark 52

Trademark Registration Music Intellectual Property 52

Patently-O

DECEMBER 12, 2021

Missouri’s predominant purpose test, which inquires into whether the predominant purpose of using the famous person’s name or identity is to exploit its commercial value; or whether “the predominant purpose of the product is to make an expressive comment on or about a celebrity.” [15] 26] Which one? Sullivan , 376 U.S. 254, 270 (1964). [12]

Registration 69

Registration Government Advertising Advertising 69