The district court erred by failing to analyze infringement under reverse confusion theory.
The federal district court in Miami erred by concluding as a matter...
March 2022
By Kathryn Park, Principal, Strategic Trademark Initiatives, Connecticut, USA
What is the metaverse? In the simplest of terms, it is a virtual space...
There was no evidence to suggest that the relevant public would buy the goods at issue in conditions such that the phonetic similarity between the marks would carry more weight than the visual or conceptual similarity in the assessment of the likelihood of confusion.
It is not necessary to establish whether the plaintiff’s mark has a reputation and whether the infringement is likely to cause confusion where the parties’ marks and the goods/services at issue are identical.
We’re pleased to bring you a guest post by Sangita Sharma, looking at the Supreme Court’s order in the trademark infringement case Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. Vijaya Sai and Others. Sangita is a 3rd Year student at Gujarat National Law University and has written for us earlier here. Clarifying or Confusing the Quandary of Identical Marks: Renaissance Hotel Holdings Inc. v. Vijaya Sai and Others Sangita Sharma Are Sangita and Zai Sangita identical or similar? How does one differentiate...
There is no question that social media has created nearly limitless opportunities for social media influencers and marketers to reach their clients outside of traditional mass-media channels. The influencer market has surpassed $10 billion dollars as platforms such as Snapchat®, TikTok® and YouTube® have enabled influencers to reach a wide variety of different demographics. Whether […]
The General Court agreed with the EUIPO that there was a likelihood of confusion for goods in Classes 3 and 16, at least when the reputation of the earlier mark for lip care products was taken into account.
