Remove trademark-cancellation
article thumbnail

TTABlog Quarterly Index: October - December 2021

The TTABlog

35: TTAB Grants MIRAGE BRANDS Cancellation Petition Due To Likelihood of Reverse Confusion On Remand from the CAFC, TTAB Denies Petition for Cancellation of "NAKED" Registration for Condoms TTABlog Test: Three Recent Section 2(d) Inter Partes Cases - How Did They Come Out? Yes] Precedential No.

Cinema 67
article thumbnail

Precedential No. 34: "IFG" Fails to Function as a Trademark For Live Plants Because It's a Varietal Name

The TTABlog

The CAFC explained that an entity that is the source of a varietal may use a particular term as a trademark for its specific varietal, but it must be clear that there is also a generic name for the varietal. This notion reflects the Board’s earlier decisions that if the term is used as a designation of source (i.e.,

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Brand Identifiers are Key to Managing Competition

azrights

For example, the law won’t generally stop copying of ideas or business models or colours of other brands unless these are trademarked. Therefore, legal protection needs to be an uppermost consideration when choosing or changing brand codes because legal ownership is fundamental to effective protection of uniqueness of a brand’s identifiers.

article thumbnail

What is intellectual property (IP)?

Patent Trademark Blog

This is where trademarks play a role. Unlike patents, the role of a trademark is not to signify something new, but rather to indicate the source of the product or service. Trademarks can last indefinitely. Unlike patents, trademarks do not necessarily need to be registered in order to be protectable.

article thumbnail

A Look Back at India’s Top IP Developments of 2023

SpicyIP

We’ve tried to represent a diversity of subject matter also in this list, so it’s a mixed bag of cases dealing with patents, trademarks, copyright law etc. The Court interpreted the clause on ownership of work made during a contract of service (Section 17(c)) to not apply in situations where there is a contract between equals.

IP 124