Tag Archives: trademark

always plead a first use date: court struggles with famous foreign marks doctrine without it

Posted on August 11, 2026 by rtushnet

Teng v. Tao, No. 2:25-cv-05360-WLH-AJR, 2026 WL 2055494 (C.D. Cal. Jun. 5, 2026) Teng sued Tao for various trademark-related claims. Teng is allegedly the chairman of Plaintiff Heilongjiang Tang Huo Kung Fu Catering Co., a Chinese company that operates restaurant … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

IPSC Breakout Session 4, Design, Trademark & IP Boundaries

Posted on August 7, 2026 by rtushnet

Backdoor Trade Dress, Rachael Dickson Strange things are afoot at the PTO. Applications for line drawings of specific products. They are not configuration marks for the product design. They’re just design marks. In addition to the usual TM registration requirements, … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

IPSC Breakout Session 3 Trademark Confusion & Consumer Perception

Posted on August 7, 2026 by rtushnet

Trademark Confusion as a Matter of Law, Andrew Michaels Is infringement a proposition about the world, or about the law? Fact: an empirical predictive question about the world. Law: a normative judgment about whether there should be legal responsibility—is the … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

IPSC Opening Plenary Session: IP Openness, Secrecy, and Enclosure

Posted on August 6, 2026 by rtushnet

Selective Exploitation, Kristelia García Justifications for deference to rightsholders in enforcement context are less persuasive than justifications for deference to rightsholders in exploitation decisions. These aren’t infringers—outside of ©’s standard infringement/remedies scope. Conduct at issue: shifting content from Peacock to … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Reading list: Do Louis Vuitton’s Registered Trademarks in China Appropriate Traditional Chinese Culture?

Posted on August 4, 2026 by rtushnet

 Do Louis Vuitton’s Registered Trademarks in China Appropriate Traditional Chinese Culture? Ohio State Legal Studies Research Paper No. 980 20 Pages Posted: 4 Aug 2026 Daniel C. K. Chow Michael E. Moritz College of Law Date Written: August 03, 2026 … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Canadian imported drugs whose origin was disclosed to end consumers couldn’t trigger infringement/false advertising liability

Posted on July 6, 2026 by rtushnet

AbbVie Inc. v. Payer Matrix, LLC, No. 23 CV 2836, 2026 WL 1846752 (N.D. Ill. Jun. 26, 2026) Another round in AbbVie’s fight against Canadian imports. Payer Matrix contracts with employers or an employer’s pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) or third-party … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

INTA report on AI and likely confusion analysis

Posted on June 29, 2026 by rtushnet

 INTA’s press release is here. INTA was kind enough to invite me to the launch as press. I’m still digesting overall but the most interesting comment was about consistency: One panelist suggested that AI’s effect on this “hobgoblin of small minds” … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

6th Circuit approves of using (at least) same similarity standard for dilution as for confusion

Posted on June 8, 2026 by rtushnet

Scotts Co. v. Procter & Gamble Co., 2026 WL 1601797, No. 25-3555 (6th Cir. Jun. 4, 2026) Discussion of trade dress opinion here. False advertising claim here. The district court didn’t abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction against … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

court allows TM and false advertising claims against “toxic backlink” SEO disparagement campaign (SEM, for minimization?)

Posted on June 4, 2026 by rtushnet

Montway LLC v. Nexus AT LLC, 2026 WL 1552185, No. 25 C 13100, No. 26 C 1056 (N.D. Ill. Jun. 2, 2026) Although the UCL unfair competition claims got kicked out, federal trademark and false advertising claims survive in this … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

claim that entity sells unapproved drugs does not misrepresent “origin, sponsorship, or approval” for Lanham Act purposes

Posted on June 1, 2026 by rtushnet

Peptide Tech LLC v. Avidia Bank, 2026 WL 1506049, No. 25-13179-MJJ (D. Mass. May 28, 2026) Plaintiff sells peptides; Avidia is a bank and acquiring bank for merchants who accept credit and debit card payments. Doe defendants allegedly reported Peptide … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment