Client Perspective: Aaron Burns, CFO Upper Playground

January 19th, 2010

Fine art and fashion converge at Upper Playground, a California based apparel company that operates galleries and retail stores throughout the world.  San Francisco is home to Upper Playground’s headquarters and flagship FIFTY24SF Gallery, but the product is sold in various national and international locations.  Examples of company operated retail locations are here. For many businesses, securing trademark protection is an afterthought, but Upper Playground CFO Aaron Burns actively addresses brand protection along with the various other operational issues involved with this multifaceted business.  If Upper Playground is considering sales in Turkey, for example, we will get an email or a call inquiring into the status or availability of a trademark in that country.  Although IP protection is a very small aspect of running an international fine art and apparel business, it still gets diligently addressed.

Upper Playground Trademark

Patent Grant / University of Scranton

November 18th, 2009

U.S. Patent No. 7,584,807 for Multiple Pulsejet Boring Device for rapidly boring through the ground having directional boring capabilities.

ABSTRACT:

A method and device for boring a hole through a material along a desired path includes an umbilical subsystem [2000] connected to a boring subsystem [3000] having a plurality of pulsejets [3100]. These pulsejets [3100] repeatedly receive and ignite a combustible fluid [7] in a combustion chamber [3230] causing a portion of the fluid [7] to be forced out of a nozzle [3260] at high speeds as a fluid slug [10] that impacts materials ahead of the pulsejet [3100].

Now Serving the Greater Philadelphia Metropolitan Area

November 16th, 2009

Riddle Patent Law has contracted with American Executive Centers to better serve its clients in the Philadelphia metropolitan area.  Our Main Philadelphia regional location can be found in King of Prussia:

Riddle Patent Law
1060 First Avenue, Suite 400
King of Prussia,
PA 19406
Phone: +1-215-667-8700

With other locations at the following addresses:

Riddle Patent Law
Two Bala Plaza, Suite 300
Bala Cynwyd,
PA 19004
Phone: +1-215-667-8700
Riddle Patent Law
102 Pickering Way, Suite 200
Exton,
PA 19341
Phone: +1-215-667-8700
Riddle Patent Law
150 N. Radnor Chester Rd., Suite F 200
Radnor,
PA 19087
Phone: +1-215-667-8700
Riddle Patent Law
One Greentree Centre, Suite 201
Marlton,
NJ 08053
Phone: +1-215-667-8700
Riddle Patent Law
Two Penn Center Plaza, Suite 200
Philadelphia,
PA 19102
Phone: +1-215-667-8700
Riddle Patent Law
600 West Germantown Pike, Ste 400
Plymouth Meeting,
PA 19462
Phone: +1-215-667-8700

Coming to America / Trademarks

November 12th, 2009

In the movie Coming to America Mr. McDowell said look… me and the McDonald’s people got this little misunderstanding. See, they’re McDonald’s… I’m McDowell’s. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds.

Recent Trademark Cases in the Eastern District in Allentown

On October 26, 2009, a complaint for trademark infringement and unfair competition was filed by Tilted Kilt Franchise, LLC in the Allentown Office seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction and damages for use of the trademark TILTED KILT. The Complaint (hyperlink to attached file) states the plaintiff is a franchise company for Tilted Kilt Pubs and defendant operates a pub named The Tilted Kilt in Mount Joy PA. If you are going to build a franchise on a trademark and then license franchisees to use that mark, you must enforce your trademark rights or your franchise has little value.

The 2009 Greenovation Compeition Comes to a Close

September 24th, 2009

Another exciting Greenovation Competition has come to a close, and what a year it was.  All of the participants had some great products and ideas, and the Williamsport/Lycoming Keystone Innovation Zone did a great job of coordinating this event.

We wish to say congratulations to all of the participants and finalists. This years runner up was Equinox Ltd. who won the Runner Up Prize valued at $2,300 for their reusable Fruit, Nut & Veggie Bags.

Ralph Agnoni, was the winner of the 2009 Greenovation Competition grand prize package.  His invention is a water saving device for use with toilets.  The device is very innovative, and we here at Riddle Patent Law look forward to working with him to protect is valuable intellectual property.

Congratulations again to all!

Rediscover Scranton Welcomes Charles Riddle of Riddle Patent Law

September 3rd, 2009
Riddle Patent Law Rediscover Scranton, Patent, Trademark, Copyright

Riddle Patent Law Rediscover Scranton, Patent, Trademark, Copyright

Recent Trademark Cases Filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania

August 6th, 2009

The Hershey Company recently filed two trademark cases, one against Little i, Inc., and another against Karma Candy, Inc. These cases were filed in the district court in Harrisburg.

An interesting copyright case was filed with the federal district court in Scranton, Scholz Design, Inc. v. Heritage Homes, Ltd. This one relates to the copyright in architectural building plans.  It’s interesting because there is a separate body of copyright law that deals explicitly with the protections afforded structural blueprints and and architectural plans.

Phish, Inc. Gets Temporary Restraining Order Against John Doe Wookies for Swinging Infringing Merchandise

June 12th, 2009

Just before the 2009 tour, Phish, Inc. lands a temporary restraining order to stop the unauthorized sale and distribution of Phish branded merchandise. The suit names John Does 1-100 and ABC Corporations 1-5 (a.k.a. hairy unbathed partly dazed parking lot people) as infringers of the valuable trademarks of the Phish empire. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, granted the TRO on March 6, 2009 (the opening date of the tour, I believe). More information here.

Phish Logo / Trademark

They won’t steal their poor heart Trade-Mark again. . . . . .

The Scranton Times v. Wilkes Barre Publishing (The Times Leader)

May 19th, 2009

The news print titans of the Wilkes Barre / Scranton area are battling it out over allegedly stolen obituaries. As I understand the facts, the Times Leader allegedly copied obituaries from a Scranton Times partner website and included the “copied” obituaries in their “Scranton Edition”.

Naturally, when text is copied, the immediate thought is copyright infringement. Copyright exists in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression. Seems like it fits – what’s the problem? Facts are not copyrightable unless they are collections of facts containing some expressive content. The complaint by Scranton Times contained no counts for copyright. Rather, it contained counts for misappropriation, unfair competition, conversion, fraud, breach of contract, tortious interference with existing business relations, and unjust enrichment.

Since the complaint contained no federal counts, the case was filed with the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas. Wilkes Barre Publishing removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Asserting that no federal question of copyright existed, the Scranton Times moved to remand the case back to Lackawanna County Court. The court disagreed – essentially finding that since the copyright act preempted some of the claims, the court has subject matter jurisdiction over all claims.

So, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania will hear the case – which will likely never comprise a copyright claim (for a number of reasons) – but rather will comprise common law claims of conversion, fraud, and breach of contract. This presumes that the court very soon will dismiss the preempted counts. Here is the opinion.

As for the substance of the remaining claims (conversion, fraud, and breach of contract), I see problems which mainly concern whether Scranton Times is the proper party bringing the claim.

Count III Conversion: Who authored/owns the obits? The funeral homes? The Times Employees? Friends and family of the deceased? Are there assignments / work for hire agreements?

Count IV Fraud: What was the act of fraud, who is injured, how did the fraud cause the injury, what property / money was lost as a result of the fraud?

Count V Breach of Contract: Where is the agreement between the parties? The Scranton Times website contains no contractual provisions concerning use of the site in the terms of service. So, if it is claimed that breach of contract stems from a terms of use provision of a website, it should be a website owned by Scranton Times.

In parting, if this case boils down to copying facts (uncopyrightable material) from a website and republishing the same, a look into the body of law concerning electronic trespass to chattels.

Top 10 Trademark Guidelines All Companies Need To Know

May 4th, 2009

  1. Pick a trademark that is not confusingly similar with an already existing brand – especially where the prior brand is for related goods, or the prior brand is well known. It seems quite obvious but, in most cases, simpling changing a few letters of some other brand name well not keep you free from infringement. Confusing similarity between brands is measured, in part, by, comparing the elements of sight, sound, and/or meaning. Infringement can stem, from a finding of similarity in any one element.
  2. Don’t pick a brand name that defines or describes the goods or services you provide. These are weak trademarks that are more difficult to protect. Examples of defining / generic terms include: BREW for beer or FOOTWEAR for sneakers. Examples of descriptive terms include LIGHT for low calorie beverages or COTTON FEEL for clothing.
  3. Conduct a search before you launch your brand. You don’t want to face changing your brand name after you spent large amounts of time and money building recognition. Similarly, you don’t want to be precluded from operating in other countries because someone else uses a confusingly similar name for related goods or services.
  4. Secure registrations in the countries you sell to or expect to sell. This will help you avoid being blocked and may help you to stop knock offs. If you seek alliances with foreign businesses, keep in mind that many manufacturers and distributors refuse doing business unless the trademark registration is in place.
  5. Use trademark license provisions in your marketing and distribution agreements. These provisions give the parties specific terms governing how they operate. They also can give the owner contractual rights and remedies that can be enforced if the deal goes sour.
  6. Respect the brand by using the TM or ® designations where appropriate. In the U.S., the TM designation tells others you are treating the name as a trademark. The ® designation tells others that the name is a registered trademark, and the ® should be used with the goods or services listed in the trademark registration.
  7. Follow up by ensuring your trademark remains in use with your goods and services. If the brand’s trademark has changed over time, or the goods / services have changed you may need to amend the registration or apply for a new one.
  8. Protect your non-trademark intellectual property by securing copyright, patent, or design patent registration where applicable. Your product packaging artwork often screams brand identity and also should be secured to the extent possible with a copyright registration. The design of the product itself may be protected by a utility patent if the conditions of patentability are met. Similarly, the product itself or the design imprinted on a product may often be protected by copyright or design patent. This belt and suspenders approach often helps fight against brand erosion.
  9. Be vigilant by looking out for newcomers to the market that may be using your intellectual property without authorization. Enforce your rights if you find anyone conducting such unauthorized activities. Your failure to enforce your rights over time may provide the “bad guy” with a defense to an action for infringement.
  10. Get professional help. If you seek answers, retain counsel to look into your specific situation. This way you will get thoughtful consideration of your facts as they are applied to the relevant law. This brand protection info is generalized and exceptions may apply under your particular situation. This rules may change with time and also with jurisdiction.