Remove 2013 Remove Advertising Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

Revival of the Third-party Trademark as a Keyword Dispute

SpicyIP

We are pleased to bring you a guest post from Payal Saraogi, on a recent decision of the Delhi High Court on Google’s use of trademarks as advertisement keywords. Payal has graduated from the School of Law, Christ University in 2020, and currently practices as a disputes lawyer. Confusion caused by Google’s keyword policy.

Trademark 105
article thumbnail

Top Trademark Trends of 2022

Erik K Pelton

On November 7 th , Conde Nast sued Drake and 21 Savage for $4 million for false advertising and infringing Vogue’s trademarks. Pelton & Associates ®, a boutique trademark law firm in Falls Church, Virginia. trademarks for clients and has represented hundreds of parties in trademark disputes.

Trademark 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Finding the Real “Burger King”: Identical Marks & Prior Use in the Pune Eatery Case

SpicyIP

In Mohan Meakin Ltd v AB Sugars Ltd (2013), wherein the mark TALL MOM was deemed identical to OLD MONK on grounds of phonetic similarity, despite the difference in product categories (former being country liquor and latter being Indian Made Foreign Liquor), the Delhi HC found infringement under section 29(2)(c), while presuming consumer confusion.

article thumbnail

Landmark Trademark Battles: Shaping Brand Protection Globally and in India

IP and Legal Filings

3] [Image Sources: Shutterstock] Starbucks vs. Charbucks: This long-running dispute from 2001 to 2013 over a small New Hampshire coffee roaster’s use of “Charbucks” for dark roast coffee, arguing that Starbucks had diluted its famous trademark, places a number of issues regarding trademark dilution and parody at the very centre of this case.

article thumbnail

THE CONSUMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT: BOOKING-DOT-WHAT, BOOKING-DOT-TRADEMARKED

JIPL Online

com” at after a generic word, “Booking,” still makes “Booking.com” generic within traditional trademark law [xiv] and (2) the fact consumer identify “Booking.com” doesn’t change the fact that it is still generic and thus ineligible for trademark registration. [xv] 21, 2013), [link]. [vi] Booking.com B.V., at 2301 (2020).

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 31: De Minimis Sales of Amplifiers Over Six-Year Period Leads to Cancellation of "CS" Registration for Abandonment

The TTABlog

But after 2013, when Respondent last advertised the CS amps in its domestic catalogs, domestic sales plummeted, rapidly dwindling to single digits and then zero at some points in the critical 2016-2021 time frame. Lanham Act, Section 45.

article thumbnail

The Sleekcraft Factors and “Reverse Confusion” Trademark Infringement

The IP Law Blog

It has marketed its software under the name “SmartSync” since 2004 and obtained a trademark for SmartSync in 2007. It sells its software primarily to the United States Navy but, in 2013, sold its software to at least one major pharmacy chain.