Category Archives: Uncategorized

Intellectual Property Lawyer Kaitlin Corey Scores Win in WIPO Trademark Proceeding

Posted on by
Kaitlin Corey - Business and intellectual property lawyer at Goodell DeVries

Kaitlin Corey – Business and intellectual property lawyer at Goodell DeVries

Intellectual property lawyer Kaitlin Corey recently secured a win for her client, a process serving company, in an administrative panel decision in the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) Arbitration and Mediation Center. The complaint, which was filed by a competing process serving company, alleged that the client’s use of a particular domain name for its website infringed the complainant’s federally registered trademark.

In her WIPO response, Kaitlin established that the complainant’s federally registered trademark is merely descriptive, and the complainant failed to prove secondary meaning to establish a protectable mark. The Panelist also found that the complainant brought its WIPO complaint in bad faith, finding that its attempt to transfer the domain name was an attempt at “Reverse Domain Name Hijacking.”

This case serves as a worthwhile lesson to business owners to choose protectable trademarks and steer clear of descriptive marks.

Taking Aim at Press Freedoms

Posted on by

Don Blankenship was convicted of conspiracy related to a deadly mine explosion. He was sentenced to one year in prison, a day less than a felony sentence. He served his sentence in a prison where he was the only inmate in for a misdemeanor.

A rich man, Don ran for the U.S. Senate when he got out of prison. Numerous media, in error, reported he was a convicted felon. Blankenship sued the media for defamation claiming his reputation was irreparably damaged. The lower courts dismissed his suit on the basis of New York Times v. Sullivan.

Blankenship petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States to hear his case and toss or modify Sullivan, asserting that Sullivan, “grant[s] the press a license to publish defamatory falsehoods that misinform[s] voters … and incite[s] unrest.” Maybe, but the requirement for that license under Sullivan is strenuous.

Continue reading →

Why Hunter Biden Wins His Gun Case

Posted on by

There is a special brand of irony that Hunter Biden, son of anti-gun President Joe Biden, will use last year’s Supreme Court decision in N.Y.S. Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen to challenge his indictment for being a drug addict in possession of a gun and lying under oath to buy that gun.

The president himself issued a statement following the Bruen decision, “I am deeply disappointed by (the court’s) ruling in (Bruen) … I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens safer from gun violence.”

Yes, gun violence is an epidemic in this country, and Bruen makes it far harder for government to enforce laws aimed at reducing gun violence.

Continue reading →

Goodell DeVries’s IP Group Honored in Best Lawyers 2024

Posted on by

Congratulations to Jim Astrachan and Donna M.D. Thomas on once again being selected for Best Lawyers in America, and to Kaitlin D. Corey on being selected for Best Lawyers Ones to Watch for 2024.

Jim is named in the Advertising Law, Communications Law, Copyright Law, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Trademark Law categories. He has appeared in Best Lawyers every year since 2006.

Donna is named in the Copyright Law and Trademark Law categories. She’s been selected for Best Lawyers annually since 2015.

Kaitlin is named in the Corporate Law; Intellectual Property Law; Litigation – Intellectual Property categories.

The Least of Ye’s Troubles

Posted on by

The rapper formerly known as Kanye West is in a dump truckload of trouble for, among other things, his display of a “White Lives Matter” T-shirt.  The slogan’s so-called owners are calling him out for trademark infringement.

As bad as the politics might be, Ye, as he is now known, did no trademark harm. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, as a general rule, will refuse to register a trademark if the submitted specimen shows that use of the mark is decorative or ornamental.  A trademark must indicate a source of goods. Continue reading →

The First Amendment and Social Media

Posted on by

The Texas Legislature enacted HB 20, a gobsmacking law, in September 2021, declaring social media platforms and interactive computer services to be “common carriers,” charged, as the bill reads, with a public interest of being “central forums for public debate.”

HB 20 defines social media as an internet website having more than 50 million users that is open to the public and allows users to create accounts to communicate with others through the posting of information, comments, and messages or images. Media giants like YouTube and Twitter are affected. A few days ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit held the law to be constitutional and enforceable.

Continue reading →

Bankruptcy Treatment of Trademark Licenses

Posted on by

Worth mentioning if a licensee or licensor of a mark is facing bankruptcy, is a 2019
Supreme Court decision.  Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, 139 S.Ct. 1652 (2019).  Decided 8–to–1 following a split among the circuits, the Court resolved the effect of a debtor in bankruptcy’s attempted rejection of a trademark license.

The question was would the rejection constitute a breach of contract, or a recission that would bar the licensee from ongoing use of the licensed mark?  The stakes are high for most licensees that want to continue to do business using the licensor’s mark. Continue reading →