Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
You Know What It Is: Taco Tuesday and the Failure-to-Function Doctrine In Trademark Law
In LeBron James' house, Tuesday nights mean one thing: Tacos. In a series of Instagram posts last year, the NBA superstar gleefully announced to his 50-plus million followers that he and his family were enjoying the tradition of eating tacos on Tuesday. It picked up enough attention that James decided to file an intent-to-use trademark application for TACO TUESDAY, including for "advertising and marketing services," "podcasting services," and "online entertainment services" (see, Ser. No. 88579771). But as the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and numerous other outlets reported, the application was refused by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in a Sept. 11, 2019 office action. One reason given for the refusal was that the applied-for mark did not "function as a trademark." See, http://bit.ly/39JPoO7.
The foundational requirement that a trademark function as a trademark has received little attention in the case law. More recently, however, there has been an apparent uptick in scrutiny of trademark use by the USPTO and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), as well as fresh academic attention paid to the issue.
For a designation to be protectable as a trademark, it must identify and distinguish the source of a good or service (even if that source is unknown). This threshold protectability inquiry is often centered on the question of distinctiveness, that is, whether a designation is sufficiently distinctive in relation to the goods or services at issue for trademark protection to adhere. But distinctiveness alone is not sufficient for a designation to be protectable as a trademark. A designation must also serve to identify the source of a good or service.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?