LexBlog IP

SEPTEMBER 13, 2023

The cannabis industry presents a unique opportunity for former employees to misappropriate a company’s intellectual property. In this example, if the Michigan cannabis company has not taken any steps to protect its marks in California, fewer remedies (if any) are available to stop its brand’s misappropriation.

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Branding Brands Branding 52

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 30, 2023

Yet cannabis businesses continue to grapple with protecting their brands, as trademark protection at the federal level remains unavailable. The current hodgepodge of state trademark regimes will undoubtedly result in litigation and a race to register federal marks once Congress legalizes cannabis. For example : Subway IP LLC v.

Due Diligence 52

Due Diligence Intellectual Property Branding Brands 52

LexBlog IP

SEPTEMBER 6, 2023

In our previous post, we discussed how a cannabis business can take steps to avoid potential trademark infringement claims. In this release, we will discuss how a cannabis business can use trademarks for brand protection – despite the fact that federal law prohibits filing a cannabis-related trademark.

Trademark 52

Trademark Registration Ownership Business 52

IP and Legal Filings

NOVEMBER 30, 2022

By 2050, the predicted $0.5 Trade in goods and services, investments, intellectual property, dispute resolution, e-commerce, small and medium-sized businesses, and economic cooperation are the main topics of discussion during the negotiations. Impact on the IPR Regime.

Intellectual Property 66

Intellectual Property Marketing Marketing IP 66