Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
TTAB Allows for Non-User to Oppose Trademark for Reputational Injury
It is well-established that, in general, for a trademark owner to have standing to assert rights in a mark in the United States, the mark must be in use in the United States. Occasionally a U.S. court has recognized cross-border rights, where a product is in such wide use in a neighboring jurisdiction that it is effectively in use in the United States even if not directed at the United States. In a more recent case, although finding no standing in the case in front of it, a federal court noted that it was, however, possible that a nonuser could demonstrate entitlement to cancel or oppose by establishing either lost sales in the United States or reputational injury in the United States under 15 U.S.C. Section 1064(3), better known as Section 14(3) of the Lanham Act. See, Meenaxi Enterprise v. Coca-Cola, 38 F.4th 1067 (Fed. Cir. 2022). This section, which does not require that the party relying on it have a registration or use in the United States, provides grounds for attacking a trademark application or registration if, among other things, the mark at issue is being used to misrepresent the source of goods or services.
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has now picked up that hypothetical and made it a reality in one of the first of its 2025 precedential decisions, sustaining Plumrose Holding Ltd.’s opposition to the attempted registration by USA Ham LLC of its mark “LA MONTSERRATINA” (the opposed mark) in the logo form pictured here for various meat products:
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.
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?
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.