Heitner Legal
Is the word “RIOT” now so attached to the company Riot Games that no other company can use the word in its name? Riot Games seems to think so based on its recent initiation of a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Gatorade used the slogan “Gatorade The Sports Fuel Company” and SportFuel, Inc. sued, claiming trademark infringement. The district court threw out the case after it decided that Gatorade’s slogan was construed as fair use. SportFuel appealed.
Mondelez is suing a company called Stoney Patch for trademark infringement. It claims that THC gummy products created and sold by Stoney Patch were intentionally designed to copy the Sour Patch brand under a confusingly similar name and packaging. It additionally says that it is especially concerned about confusing children, since the packaging is likely […]
The State of Illinois is home to a big new battle over the rights to use marks related to male grooming. You have definitely heard the words “manscaping” and “manscaped” used before, and now they are basically the subject of a federal court trademark dispute.
Is the domain name “OrderMyOil.com” entitled to common law trademark protection? An appellate court in Massachusetts has answered in the negative.
In 2019, if you want a quick, easy way to send or receive money without paying a fee, you are likely using the app Venmo. It has become so popular that people will often ask to be Venmo’d money. As can be the case, a noun becomes a verb based on heightened usage.
The rock band Guns N’ Roses has been around since 1984 and is a known name in the music industry to just about everyone in the United States. While the band members have spent most of their lives creating and performing music, they are now going to be occupied with litigating a trademark infringement lawsuit […]
MomoMilk LLC, the owner of trademark registrations to the word mark “MILK BAR” and design marks for a stylized versions of “milk,” has filed a federal lawsuit against Milk Bar, LLC in Illinois. The plaintiff claims that the defendant has infringed on its trademarks based on the defendant’s use of a confusingly similar stylized design […]
In some trademark cases, the plaintiff sues the defendant for trademark infringement based on what is considered to be a reverse-confusion theory. This means that the plaintiff believes that consumers will mistakenly believe that the defendant is the source, affiliate or sponsor of the plaintiff’s product or service.
I thought that one of the better Super Bowl XLIII advertisements was delivered by Expensify, because it simply demonstrated the value of its service in an effective manner. It appears that a competitor is trying to benefit from Expensify’s Super Bowl exposure, which has led to the filing of a lawsuit by Expensify for trademark […]