-
Over Again for STOLI – But Just For Now
Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport first sued Spirits International B.V. over the STOLICHNAYA trademark 10 years ago, in October, 2004. Two lawsuits later, FTE still hasn’t survived an examination of its standing. The case has been dismissed a second in the district court, but even the district court thinks that an appeal is warranted: “In the short… Continue reading
-
When Trademark and Estate Don’t Mix
What a dispute. I’ve written before (recursive link) about the dispute over the ownership of the mark YOGI for at least tea. I say “at least” because what seems to be missing from the four (or more) lawsuits that involve the trademark is the concept that a trademark has something to do with goods and… Continue reading
-
Having Documents Helps
I usually write about ownership issues in the context of infringement claims. But I ran across a tax case where management (or actually, lack of management) of the ownership of the intellectual property ended up creating a tax deficiency on 29.6 million dollars. In 1976 William and Patricia Cavallaro started a contract manufacturing company, Knight… Continue reading
-
Remember the Details
This case demonstrates why you follow up to make sure tasks get completed. Sometimes it’s the little details that get you … Vincent Heck is the sole member of plaintiff Clarity Software LLC, a company that distributes software. Heck wrote the original software, owned a couple of companies and licensed the software to those companies… Continue reading
-
It’s All About the Words
Here’s a short one. We have co-inventors, the relevant one is James McGhie. He was an inventor on a patent of which the patent-in-suit was a continuation-in-part. McGhie assigned the original patent to the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff, but didn’t assign his ownership of the continuation-in-part. The plaintiff argued that the assignment of the parent… Continue reading
-
The Promiscuous Licensor
I recently took the federal courts to task for what I submit is a disconnect between the statutory definition of “abandonment” and the “naked license” defense. My argument is that trademark owners are simply being punished for behavior that is seen as too lax, without any regard for whether that laxness has actually effected a… Continue reading
-
How to Put a Dead Stop to a Patent Infringement Suit … For Now
I previously wrote about a Federal Circuit decision with a bit of an odd fact pattern. There was some kind of joint development between the University of New Mexico (UNM) and Sandia. A Sandia inventor assigned a resulting patent, the ‘998 patent, to UNM instead of his employer, Sandia. UNM then assigned the patent to… Continue reading
-
STOLICHNAYA Case Still Alive, Just Barely
Oh, Federal Treasury Enterprise Sojuzplodoimport, without you I wouldn’t be so good at spelling “Stolichnaya.”* I’ve lost count of the opinions talking about who owns the STOLICHNAYA trademark and we’re now on the second lawsuit over it. It all stems from a disputed claim of ownership of the STOLICHNAYA mark in the United States. To… Continue reading
-
A Partner is Not Hired to Invent
We have an interesting “employed to invent” story which arose in what I suspect can be the most common of situations—two people invent a product, form a company to commercialize it, file a patent application, and then have a falling out before the patent application is even completed. Who owns the patent? In Legacy Seating,… Continue reading
-
Let’s Kill the “Naked License” Defense
Those of you who have been reading my blog for awhile know that I’m not a fan of the naked licensing defense. The Trademark Reporter was kind enough to print a Comment I wrote explaining why I dislike it so. Click on the image for a copy. Thanks to The Trademark Reporter for granting permission… Continue reading