Remove what-is-likelihood-of-confusion
article thumbnail

Logos Remain Relevant: Source Confusion and Design Patent Infringement

Patently-O

This post will focus on another key issue from the case – the relevance of logos in design patent infringement analysis. Design Patent Infringement vs. Trademark Infringement The standards for proving design patent infringement and trademark infringement differ significantly regarding the relevance of consumer confusion about product source.

article thumbnail

Inferring Secondary Meaning from Product Design Copying

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch In patent law, product copying can serve as indirect evidence of non-obviousness. A pending petition before the Supreme Court asks a similar question in the trademark realm – to what extent does copying of a product serve as evidence of secondary meaning of the product associated trade dress.

Copying 57
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

Likely confusion alone justifies liability but not damages or profits in exercise equipment case

43(B)log

So a lot of interesting discussion of what suffices for a profits and damages award. But it overturned the $1 million in damages because there was no evidence of actual confusion. But it overturned the $1 million in damages because there was no evidence of actual confusion. Core Health & Fitness, LLC, 2022 WL 2751685, F.4th

article thumbnail

Advocate General vs. German Supreme Court – Does the use of four rings on a car grille infringe Audi’s trademark?

The IPKat

The Supreme Court found that the shape of the mounting device created a likelihood of confusion. The ring-shaped device is for mounting the original Audi logo. A similar case has been brought before a Polish court, which had doubts whether Audi’s trade mark is infringed. Background Audi owns EU trade mark no. 14(1)(c) EUTMR.

Art 130
article thumbnail

Fashion at McDonald’s: When a 'Happy Meal’ becomes an it-bag

The IPKat

This Kat then finds it amusing to try to determine on what basis the fast food company could sue Saint Laurent, if such a dispute where ever to arise. An example of a Happy Meal box Thoughts Patent law is ruled out from the analysis. It's not always about being new-new because who is new-new?".

Designs 62
article thumbnail

AI and IP – A real conversation starter

IP Whiteboard

The consultation covers five key areas of IP – patents, copyright, designs, trade marks and trade secrets. The UK IPO is keen to understand the role of the patent system in encouraging use and development of AI. Also open for discussion is the legal framework applicable to AI inventions and liability in the event of infringement.

IP 40
article thumbnail

Defining Boundaries: IP Law Addresses Exterritoriality, Lexicography & Human Touch

LexBlog IP

“Yes, the law is about words.,” And Ken White noted more recently that “the entire project of the law is about words meaning specific things.” Indeed, understanding and enforcing the rule of law is itself commonly about defining an undefined concept. One is the case of Abitron Austria GMBH v.

Law 52