Search for: "Mark Toy"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,367
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jun 2023, 3:45 am
The trademark case was initiated due to VIP Products’ sales of a dog chew toy labeled “Bad Spaniels,” designed as a parody of Jack Daniel’s famous whiskey bottle. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 1:01 pm
She even “set a timer to ensure equal time with toys[.] [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 12:04 pm
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:54 am
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:46 am
”[19] The Supreme Court emphasized that its opinion was narrow and that “[o]n infringement, we hold only that Rogers does not apply when the challenged use of a mark is as a mark” and [o]n dilution, we hold only that the noncommercial exclusion does not shield parody or other commentary when its use of a mark is similarly source-identifying. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
In 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a bench trial verdict finding that the dog toy infringed and diluted Jack Daniel’s trademarks, reasoning that the dog toy was “expressive” and thus the lower court erred by not applying the Rogers test. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 4:52 am
For example, VIP’s packaging included two marks: one for “SILLY SQUEAKERS,” the overall product line, and one for “BAD SPANIELS,” the specific toy. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 8:54 am
Supreme Court ruled that potential trademark infringers are not automatically shielded from liability for infringement by simply claiming that their use of another party’s registered mark includes a comical message. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 4:33 pm
All of this came to a head in a case about a dog toy. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 3:26 pm
In its decision, the Court held that the Ninth Circuit’s application of the Rogers test was inappropriate and that VIP’s products, while they may be intended to be humorous and parodic, use a number of marks as source-identifiers in the BAD SPANIELS toy and is thus subject to the standard likelihood of confusion test under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 3:26 pm
In its decision, the Court held that the Ninth Circuit’s application of the Rogers test was inappropriate and that VIP’s products, while they may be intended to be humorous and parodic, use a number of marks as source-identifiers in the BAD SPANIELS toy and is thus subject to the standard likelihood of confusion test under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 8:20 am
” All members of the court joined Kagan’s opinion finding that toy a condemnable infringement of the Jack Daniel’s marks. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 8:00 am
The case arose from Jack Daniel’s complaint about VIP’s sale of a dog toy designed to resemble a bottle of Jack Daniel’s whiskey. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 7:07 am
Here’s the Friday morning read: Supreme Court rules in favor of Black Alabama voters in unexpected defense of Voting Rights Act (Mark Sherman, The Associated Press) Supreme Court sides with Jack Daniel’s in poop-themed dog toy trademark fight (Devan Cole, CNN) The Supreme Court’s Damper on the Right to Strike (E. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 6:30 pm
VIP’s dog toy resembles a Jack Daniel’s whiskey bottle, with several allegedly humorous alterations. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 11:48 am
Instead, Rogers does not apply when the trademark is being used as a mark. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 10:46 am
After all, granting a copyright or trademark to some work or mark means that the law restricts speech--namely the speech of others who would copy the work or use the mark without paying for a license. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 9:15 am
EUIPO’s Opposition Division upheld the opposition on the basis of a trade mark with a reputation (Art. 8(5) EUTMR), but only for the following goods: ‘Detergents; Soap; grease-removing preparations’ in class 3; ‘Drinking bottles; drinking bottles for sports’ in class 21; and ‘Scooters [toys]; tricycles for infants [toys]; scooters for kids; gloves for games’ in class 28. [read post]
19 May 2023, 8:38 am
Roblox authorized plaintiff Jazwares to manufacture “Avatar Figurines,” real-world toys based on the digital Avatars. [read post]
19 May 2023, 4:15 am
” VIP Products, on the other hand, has maintained its stance that the use of its “Bad Spaniels” name and mark “does not infringe or dilute any claimed trademark rights,” and that the at-issue dog toy bears design elements that “make it clear that the product is a parody. [read post]
