Monthly Archives: November 2022

Nike v. StockX: “Running” to NFTs

Have you heard of NFTs, or non-fungible tokens? In recent years, NFTs and their associated intellectual property rights are increasingly embroiled in legal battles. One such example is Nike v. StockX, a NFT trademark case filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. This case demonstrates that fashion brands like Nike are willing to battle in the courtroom for intellectual property rights in NFTs.

Continue reading

Kim Kardashian’s Latest Line Is Causing Trademark Trouble

Everyone knows her. Some dislike her. Ultimately, she’s one of the wealthiest women in the world. She has her hands in everything from entertainment, to clothing, to gaming. She is even currently studying to be a lawyer. Kim Kardashian seems like she may have it all, but her latest business venture may not be what she was hoping for.

Photo of Kim Kardashian by Eva Rinaldi Celebrity Photographer, licensed via Creative Commons.

She recently announced the release of her own skincare line, “SKKN by Kim.” Pronounced “skin,” the name has recently been called into question. Kim has recently applied for several trademarks for the new line, which may or may not be granted.

Continue reading

From the Studio Lot to Law School

During my junior year of undergrad, I was ecstatic when I received an offer to join the Legal Department of Fox Entertainment Group (now, 20th Century Studios) as a Content Protection Intern.  The idea of working on a major studio lot was more than exciting to someone who had grown up an hour away from Hollywood. Continue reading

Taking a Bite Out of the Apple: Apple’s Crusade against Trademark Infringement

Photo by Zhang Kaiyv via Unsplash

Apple is one of the largest companies in the world with arguably the best brand recognition of any global company. No matter what country you are in, if you mention Apple most people would recognize the brand and its suite of Macintosh and iPhone products. You may even be using an Apple product right now to view this article.

Continue reading

Cat Got Your Trademark

We’re all used to seeing the big Caterpillar industrial machines featuring the word CAT. The CAT mark has been easily recognizable at any construction site throughout America for decades. Because of the brand’s popularity, Caterpillar expanded its use of the CAT mark to include apparel, headwear, bags, and other accessories. Caterpillar sells its clothing through its website and prominent retailers such as Amazon, JCPenney, and Sears. Its products have been featured on national television programs, newspaper and magazine articles, online publications, and fashion and lifestyle publications. However, CAT may have some competition.


Photo by Sindy Süßengut, licensed
by Unsplash

A trademark is “a word, phrase, symbol, and/or design that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of the others.” In other words, the trademark indicates that the goods/services come from a specific source. A valid trademark is used on goods/services in commerce, and it is distinctive in that it identifies the source of the
goods/services.

On October 9, 2012, Puma obtained a federal registration for its mark, PROCAT, which covers clothing, footwear, and headgear. Registering PROCAT grants Puma the right to use the mark in all 50 states and provides public notice that Puma is the mark owner. Because registration proves ownership, if Puma wants to bring a trademark infringement case to federal court, it wouldn’t need further evidence to establish validity.

On October 6, 2017, Caterpillar, Inc. submitted to its petition to cancel Puma’s registration for the mark PROCAT for footwear and headbands. A cancellation petition can be filed at any time. It allows one party to challenge a trademark because a registered mark is likely to be confused with another party’s mark, the registrant could have obtained the mark fraudulently, the mark is generic, or the registrant is no longer using its mark.

Continue reading