IP and Legal Filings

MARCH 14, 2022

The plaintiff, Chanel, Inc. (“Chanel”), is an iconic fashion company based in New York known for its luxury fashion products and owns rights to several Chanel and CC monograms trademarks associated with the brand design. 1114(1)(a), false endorsement and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. Veronique Idea Corp.,

Branding 52

Branding Brands Branding False Advertising 52

IP and Legal Filings

MARCH 14, 2022

The plaintiff, Chanel, Inc. (“Chanel”), is an iconic fashion company based in New York known for its luxury fashion products and owns rights to several Chanel and CC monograms trademarks associated with the brand design. 1114(1)(a), false endorsement and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. Veronique Idea Corp.,

False Advertising 52

False Advertising Branding Brands Branding 52

SpicyIP

AUGUST 2, 2024

In 2011, in the landmark case of Titan Industries Ltd. It recognized that a famous personality has the right to control where and how their identity is used, and further stated that publicity rights move much beyond the legal limits of false advertising.

Branding 105

Branding Brands Branding Personality Rights 105

43(B)log

JANUARY 2, 2024

Does this cause any problems for the One A Day trademark?) 10-CV-1662, 2011 WL 13224118 (E.D. July 22, 2011)). 28, 2023) Another day, another “One A Day” claim where the bottle instructs users that, you guessed it, a daily serving is more than one gummy. NY GBL § 349 and § 350 claims survived. Bayer AG, No. App’x 325 (9th Cir.

Branding 59

Branding Brands Branding Marketing 59

43(B)log

OCTOBER 6, 2021

In a 2011 presentation, Walkowicz discussed their work on NASA’s Kepler Mission studying the constellation Lyra, including the constellation’s brightest star, called Vega.” American Girl applied for trademarks on a space-themed doll named Luciana Vega, which it began marketing in 2018 as its “Girl of the Year” doll.

Law 59

Law Privacy False Advertising Social Media 59

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

OCTOBER 9, 2024

Whatever legal ambiguity might have existed then has been decisively resolved, at least with respect to competitive keyword ads that don’t use the trademark in the ad copy. Courts almost never found trademark infringement in those cases, but it was only in the last decade that we started to get opinions saying this bluntly and clearly.

Advertising 98

Advertising Advertising Trademark False Advertising 98

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

AUGUST 30, 2023

The plaintiff has a trademark registration for the “Nursing CE Central” mark for providing continuing education for nurses. A rival, Colibri, displayed in the trademark in its Google keyword ads, but it claims it has stopped doing so after the lawsuit was filed. ” Actual confused. “Undetermined.” Not relevant.

Advertising 98

Advertising Advertising False Advertising Trademark 98

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

SEPTEMBER 14, 2021

But trademark plaintiffs and judges are still partying like it’s 1999. Defendant has also used Plaintiffs’ trademarks “Seeking Millionaire,” “Seeking Arrangement,” “Whats Your Price,” “Carrot Dating,” and “Seeking” as search terms in the Apple Appstore and Google Play Store to yield LuxyApp as a search result.

Advertising 126

Advertising Advertising Trademark Settlement 126

43(B)log

APRIL 11, 2025

28, 20 This case focuses on trademark use. Drive used the symbol in connection with its DRIVE trademark for its Med-Aire mattress products between 2007 and 2020. And Med-Aire was displayed in flyers at retailers of Med-Aire products since 2011, at trade shows since 2007, and on websites since at least as early as 2009.

Trademark 52

Trademark Advertising Advertising False Advertising 52