Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
From the PTO to the FDA: What to Consider When Branding Clinical Trials
The legal implications of branding generally arise for companies during the process of selecting a company name and any initial product or service names. For drug development companies, however, careful consideration should also be paid to the implications of branding a clinical trial.
Our experience and observations suggest that branding clinical trials has become more prevalent. While it may seem unnecessary to brand a clinical trial because of its limited duration and pre-market nature, the long road to market for therapeutics makes building a recognizable house brand or product name challenging for companies before regulatory approval. As a result, companies are turning to the clinical trial process as an early-phase opportunity to establish a brand identity, raise public awareness of the company's mission, and create market familiarity with the company's technology and discovery objectives.
Each month in the U.S. around 800 clinical trials are commenced and around 80 trademark applications are filed that use the phrase "clinical trial(s)" in the specification of goods or services. These applications typically cover Class 9 (applications or software for clinical trials), Class 35 (recruiting for clinical trials), or Class 42 (medical research). The number of trademark applications related to clinical trials has steadily increased from 2018-2020, with filing volume spiking significantly from May 2020-July 2020. The spike in applications was followed by a corresponding increase in clinical trials from August 2020-November 2020, suggesting that companies are applying for trademarks relating to clinical trial activity several months before trials actually begin.
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.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?