Last month, Amazon Web Services (“AWS”) announced a new application, Amazon Chime, for online meetings, including video and voice conferencing, chat, and screen sharing. Amazon Chime will compete against a crowd of other well-established products with similar services, such as GoToMeeting, Cisco WebEx, and Skype.
Just two weeks after Amazon Chime was announced, on
We continue to anxiously await the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision in Frito-Lay North America, Inc. v. Princeton Vanguard, LLC, especially given the Board’s recent genericness ruling in Sheetz of Delaware, Inc. v. Doctor’s Associates, Inc., finding FOOTLONG generic for “sandwiches, excluding hot dogs.”
The question at issue in Frito-Lay’s trademark challenge
Earlier this month E.J. Schultz of AdAge wrote about Kraft’s plan to revive Jell-O:
“For Kraft Foods Group, J-E-L-L-O has spelled disappointment of late. The brand — once known for fun advertising starring the likes of Jack Benny and Bill Cosby — has struggled to find its identity in recent years, while marketing reductions
With all the golf coverage of the Masters Tournament and the coveted Green Jacket, this past weekend, it seemed particularly appropriate to report on a recent trademark case involving the miniature variety of golf: Putt-Putt, LLC v. 416 Constant Friendship, LLC (April 5, 2013 D. Md.).
So, I learned two things this weekend, Adam
It has been almost six months since oral argument before the TTAB over the question of whether the word “footlong” is a trademark or a generic name for a type of sandwich. What type of sandwich you ask? One about twice as long as a six inch sandwich, let’s say about twelve inches in length,
Knowing how Adidas (or should I say, adidas) jealously guards its three stripe design on shoes, and is notorious for protecting against not only three, but two and four stripe buffers as well, my eyes were drawn to this display of Nike Shox sport shoes at our local Finish Line retail store.
There has been quite a flap surrounding the poster and invitation used by the University of Pennsylvania Law School to promote Penn Intellectual Property Group’s Fashion Law Symposium, scheduled for a week from tomorrow. The symposium appears to be designed as a serious affair, boasting an all-star cast of general counsel from the fashion
–Dan Kelly, Attorney
Back in September of 2010, I discussed a couple of then-recent cases about Georgia-Pacific’s trademark lawsuits over the “stuffing” of non-Georgia-Pacific paper towels into GP’s proprietary dispensers. By way of brief review, the Eighth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision out of the Western District of Arkansas holding that the practice of
—Karen Brennan, attorney
I found Fig. 1 (from what I am sure was a very valuable patent, although I could not locate it) to be very fitting for this post. After three and half years, four Office Actions, a Petition to the Director and finally an appeal, our client’s product configuration mark for the PPK
–Dan Kelly, Attorney
There has been a fair amount of ink spilled in the IP blogosphere about last month’s Georgia Pacific v. Von Drehle opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. This is one of several cases that Georgia-Pacific has brought to stop the “stuffing” of off-brand (i.e. non-Georgia-Pacific