Pamela Chestek
-
You Have to Use a Mark to Own It
The main lesson here is be careful who you go into business with, or at least have an agreement that keeps them from backstabbing you. Defendant William Brady was the president of a company called Xponential, Inc. d/b/a EKR. EKR was a consulting firm that assisted startups with business strategy, marketing, creative services, and technology […] Continue reading
-
Can Only One Member of a Collective Abandon Their Share of a Mark?
There’s something that doesn’t seem right about this case, but then it’s a band case. Those are in their own trademark world. This one is about The Rascals. The original members of The Rascals (originally known as The Young Rascals), formed in 1965, were Felix Cavaliere, Gene Cornish, Eddie Brigati and Dino Danelli: (Dig the […] Continue reading
-
Terminating the Copyright in a Trademark
The Copyright Act gives a great deal of power to the original creators of works. For works created after 1977, the original author of a work can terminate any grant of rights roughly between 35 and 40 years after the date of the grant and provided that at least two years’ notice of the termination […] Continue reading
-
Jus Tertii is Disfavored Except When It 100% Works
This is a litigation strategist’s dream. I don’t think the outcome is right, but I will say it was really excellent lawyering. Plaintiff Business Moves Consulting, Inc. owns a trademark registration for: for a long list of clothing items. It sued Collegiate Licensing Company, LLC and others for trademark infringement.1 CLC is a licensing agent […] Continue reading
-
The Standing of an Exclusive Trademark Licensee (or not)
July 7, 2020: Updated to add footnote 2. Section 32 of the Lanham Act is for infringement of registered trademarks. The section says that the liability for infringement is to the “registrant.” That category undisputedly includes a successor-in-interest, such as an assignee. A minority of courts have also held that “registrant” encompasses an exclusive licensee, […] Continue reading
-
Luckily, Recording a Security Interest Does Not Assign a Patent
This is a situation I don’t recall seeing before, but perhaps that is because it took some chutzpah to make the argument. At any rate, the decision covers some interesting legal history. The decision is about is security interests. In Raffel Systems LLC v. Man Wah Holdings Ltd. Inc., the plaintiff-patentee had granted security interests […] Continue reading
-
One Work or Two?
I read the headlines about Johnson v. Nike with passing surprise, because the case was decided of on a motion to dismiss. The designs aren’t that different and what crossed my brief attention led me to think that it was a copyright infringement case about the similarity of these two designs: But it is really […] Continue reading
-
Second and Ninth Circuits Split and Also Agree
I have long disagreed with the Ninth Circuit on a standard that I think is unduly crabbed. I’m talking specifically about the cause of action, and therefore remedies available, when the obligations in an agreement that include a copyright license are not met. The courts are in agreement that the obligations can be put into […] Continue reading
-
You Can’t Just “Re-Form” a Plaintiff
Here are the facts: Ness Stewart Irvine was a patentee. Irvine assigned his patents-in-suit to InterAD Technologies, LLC. InterAD assigned them to Zeroclick, LLC (“Zeroclick I”), the plaintiff, a Texas entity. Zeroclick I sued Apple for patent infringement. Erich Spangenberg, listed as the “governing person,” terminated the Zeroclick I entity.1 Non-party Granicus IP, LLC transferred […] Continue reading
About Me
Learn more about me at my website, Chestek Legal
Recent Posts
Categories
- copyright
- domain name
- moral rights
- patent
- right of publicity
- social media
- trade dress
- trade libel
- trade secret
- trademark
- Uncategorized