Celebrities are filing trademarks to combat AI clones. Will they hold up in court?
Matthew McConaughey and Taylor Swift are among those who are using trademark registration as possible protection again misuse involving artificial intelligence.
Matthew McConaughey and Taylor Swift are among those who are using trademark registration as possible protection again misuse involving artificial intelligence.
Columnist Maren Wade says in the trademark infringement lawsuit filed in federal court that the glittery branding of Swift’s 2025 album comes too close to the aesthetic of her own “Confessions of a Showgirl.”
The complaint for trademark infringement was filed in the Southern District of Indiana last week.
The NCAA said in the complaint its trademarks are used to identify, brand, advertise and distinguish the tournaments across broadcast media, digital platforms, merchandise, sponsorships and licensed commercial activities.
Across the retail industry, it’s far from a new phenomenon. But social media is pushing the culture of online dupe shopping to new heights as influencers direct their followers to where they can buy the knockoffs.
FullBeauty Brands Inc., an online apparel retailer with a significant Indianapolis presence, is facing a lawsuit alleging that several of its swimsuits too closely resemble a competitor’s products.
A jury in U.S. District Court in South Bend earlier this month awarded recreational vehicle manufacturer Forest River Inc. a $2 million judgment in its trademark infringement case against Elkhart County rival inTech Trailers Inc.
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled Wednesday that it would rule against a man who wants to trademark the suggestive phrase “Trump too small.”
Trademark dilution law appears to be losing its significance. Another perspective, however, proposes the major drop in trademark dilution suits confirms the trademark dilution statute serves its purpose perfectly.
IU Health has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis, claiming trademark infringement and unfair competition. It is asking a judge to order Methodist Sports Medicine to change its name.
Amid all the news around the new year, you might have missed that the variety of changes to federal intellectual property laws, the Trademark Modernization Act (TMA) and the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act (CASE Act).
Valparaiso University announced Thursday that is dropping the team name Crusaders, the school mascot and all logos associated with the term that it says has been embraced by hate groups.
The Carmel-based maker of Splenda sweetener is suing the convenience store chain Speedway LLC for trademark infringement, alleging the retailer offers its customers a knockoff sweetener in yellow packets that look too much like Splenda’s packaging.
The Supreme Court is siding with fashion brand Lucky in a dispute with a Miami-based apparel manufacturer that owns the “Get Lucky” trademark.
It’s a morning of firsts for the United States Supreme Court: the first time audio of the court’s arguments will be heard live by the world and the first arguments by telephone.
In its complaint, filed Thursday in the Indianapolis division of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, 3M accuses Reno, Nevada-based Zenger LLC and its agent, Zachary Puznak, of contacting high-ranking Indiana officials and offering to sell them up to 100 million N95 respirators on behalf of 3M.
The Supreme Court of the United States is making it easier to get certain monetary awards in trademark infringement lawsuits. Justices sided unanimously Thursday with a Connecticut company, Romag, in its lawsuit against fashion accessory company Fossil.
Earth Day is upon us, and the World Intellectual Property Organization has announced a theme of “Innovate for a Green Future” for World Intellectual Property Day on April 26. Christopher Brown offers two bits of eco-minded intellectual property law.
One could assume that significant issues in federal trademark law were decided long ago; yet, the Supreme Court issued two trademark decisions in 2019 that fundamentally impact trademark protection and has granted certiorari in three trademark cases for the 2019-2020 term.
Among the circuit courts of appeal, there is an even split between the 1st, 2nd, 8th, 9th, 10th and Washington, D.C., circuits and the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 11th over whether the Lanham Act requires “willful” infringement before a plaintiff can recover profits. The United States Supreme Court is set to bring clarity to the circuit split when it hears arguments in Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., 18-1233, next month.