Remove 2016 Remove Advertising Remove Branding Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

It’s Not Going to Be (Y)easy: What Happens when Business Collaborations Dissolve?

IPilogue

On October 25, 2022, following a string of antisemitic remarks and hate speech from Ye (formerly known as Kanye West) on social media, Adidas announced their decision to terminate their co-branding partnership with Ye and end production of all Yeezy branded products.

Business 131
article thumbnail

Venice Court on “Balsamic Vinegar” and unfair competition

The IPKat

238/2016) on the organic discipline of wine cultivation and wine production and trade. The contested products were condiments marketed under names such as “Balsamico di.” 238/2016 , reserved for products obtained exclusively from the acetic fermentation of alcoholic or sugary liquids of agricultural origin. 238 (Law no.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Branding – Uniqueness and Fame

azrights

There are two drivers of brand asset strength: uniqueness and fame. For example, when you see the swoosh logo of the Nike brand you know it represents Nike even though it may be featured on its own with no name accompanying it. If an asset is less famous, it is more likely to be mistakenly attributed to a competitor’s brand.

article thumbnail

March Madness: Basketball, Brackets, and Branding

LexBlog IP

The NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament is a major revenue generator for the NCAA, with millions of dollars in advertising and broadcasting deals at stake. For example, in 2016, the NCAA filed a lawsuit against a company that was using the phrase “April Madness” to promote its own events.

article thumbnail

From Fruit to Fortune: Apple’s Trademark Journey and Their Fierce Protection Strategy

Intepat

Apple could argue transborder reputation, asserting that its brand’s recognition and reputation extend beyond national borders. Inherent Distinctiveness: The Apple logo and brand name are inherently distinctive due to their unique design and association with the company’s products, such as iPhones, iPads, MacBooks, etc.

article thumbnail

patent misrepresentations to prospective dealer could be false advertising under Dastar/Lexmark

43(B)log

Shingle Savers counterclaimed, alleging, among other things, false advertising under the Lanham Act and violation of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Moreover, the alleged misrepresentations concerned the nature of Roof Maxx’s own roofing Product and were presented in official marketing material and conversations.

article thumbnail

Inter American Convention allows claims that Lanham Act makes dubious after Abitron; but what about Article III?

43(B)log

Industria, based on Colombia, produces and distributes food products under two relevant brand names: Zenú and Ranchera. They’re successful brands: approximately $300,000,000 annually in sales of Zenú products and $100,000,000 in sales of Ranchera products. So, did Industria satisfy Lexmark ? But the third statement was literally false.