• On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7

BLIP: Blogging Patents

Read all 'trademark' posts in BLIP: Blogging Patents
May 7, 2008 9:29 AM PDT

Adidas wins big in trademark dispute

by Michael Valek
  • Post a comment
Share

On Monday, an Oregon jury returned a verdict for Adidas awarding it damages of almost $305,000,000 in a trademark dispute against Kansas-based Collective Brands Inc., which operates Payless ShoeSource. The jury found that Payless had infringed Adidas' "Three Stripe Mark" and "Superstar" trade dress by selling shoes that bore confusingly similar marks. The jury also found Payless liable for unfair and deceptive trade practices and trademark dilution.

... Read more

May 5, 2008 11:38 AM PDT

Lance Armstrong Foundation sued by holder of design patent for BARKSTRONG pet collar

by Chris Ryan
  • 2 comments
Share

In an apparent retaliatory lawsuit, Chris Ohman has sued the Lance Armstrong Foundation ("LAF") for infringing a design patent to its "BARKSTRONG" dog collar design. In his complaint, filed in the Northern District of Oklahoma last week, Mr. Ohman claims to own patent rights to the use of the LAF's signature LIVESTRONG mark on pet collars , and accuses "LIVESTRONG" pet collars sold by the LAF of infringement. The lawsuit appears extremely questionable in light of the fact that the Patent Office expressly denied Mr. Ohman design patent protection for collars with the word "LIVESTRONG " printed on them because of prior art found on none other than LAF 's own website.

The dispute between Mr. Ohman and the LAF appears to have begun in June, 2005 when Mr. Ohman began selling yellow pet collars with the markings BARKSTRONG and PURRSTRONG. Last September, to prevent dilution of its Trademark, LAF filed suit against Ohman in the Western District of Texas. According to the Texas complaint filed by the LAF, Mr. Ohman approached the LAF in July of 2005, a few weeks after filing a design patent application that, if granted, would give Ohman a patent on the use of LAF's signature LIVESTRONG mark for dog collars. Mr. Ohman's tactic did not work, and no license was granted. Meanwhile, the Patent Office refused to grant Ohman a patent with the LIVESTRONG mark, and, as shown below, Ohman was forced to remove it from his proposed drawings.

Figure Deleted in Ohman's Design Patent

(Credit: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

Undeterred, Mr. Ohman filed a lawsuit that, when scrutinized by the Court, may well raise concerns. Stay tuned for the continuing battle to see whose collars are the strongest.

  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

The yogurt makers of tech: Gadgets to avoid

Don't buy these one-trick ponies--unless you like gizmos that gather dust.

Google wants to unclog Net's DNS plumbing

The Net giant, ever eager for a faster Internet, debuts its Google Public DNS service. With it, Google could become even more central to the Net.

About BLIP: Blogging Patents

Michael Valek, Chris Ryan, and Matt Wermager are lawyers with the firm of firm of Vinson & Elkins LLP. Here, they discuss recent developments in our intellectual property system, the role the law plays to encourage innovation, as well as why any or all of this should matter to the rest of us. The postings on this site were created for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Disclaimer.

Add this feed to your online news reader

BLIP: Blogging Patents topics

Most Discussed

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right