Originally posted on June 18, 2014. I’ve been writing about the dispute over the REDSKINS trademark on this blog more or less since the beginning of the blog itself. Today a new chapter has been written — or rewritten. The TTAB has ruled and, not particularly surprisingly, the NFL team called the REDSKINS has been […]
Originally posted 2012-01-04 11:22:31. Republished by Blog Post PromoterI’ve been following the REDSKINS trademark travails since forever. Well, they’re not over. Or are they? Live with me in real-time, real-life blogging time. I got excited by a link on my Google alert for trademark news, to this story in the Washington Post: As Redskins’ struggles […]
I’ve been writing about the dispute over the REDSKINS trademark on this blog more or less since the beginning of the blog itself. Today a new chapter has been written — or rewritten. The TTAB has ruled and, not particularly surprisingly, the NFL team called the REDSKINS has been deemed, nunc pro tunc, to have […]
Originally posted 2009-06-09 12:37:25. Republished by Blog Post PromoterI didn’t have a chance to mention that last month, the order denying the legal challenge to the Washington Redskin’s use of its trademark American Indian logo was upheld. Now I have a chance! And do the unhappy Indians have a chance? They think they do. UPDATE: […]
Originally posted 2006-08-09 23:33:11. Republished by Blog Post Promoter Remember the Washington Redskins trademark tussle? CNBC reports that it’s back — again — and better than ever. This time the focus is an interesting technical tactic related to an aspect of the case involving the equitable doctrine of laches: [T]he U.S. District Court of the […]
Originally posted 2008-09-02 00:01:43. Republished by Blog Post PromoterThis story won’t die — especially judging from the prominence of related words among search terms that reach this blog. The latest, which we missed when it came out in July and we were otherwise engaged, is that the NFL’s Washington Redskins again prevailed in a lawsuit […]
Originally posted 2009-01-27 19:59:39. Republished by Blog Post PromoterFirst posted January 29, 2009. Oh, to be a hip, Jewish intellectual… property owner. Stick with me here. A while back I was following the story of the PTO’s refusal to register the mark NIGGA. As I put it then: Forget “immoral or scandalous,” which, as we […]
Hurry up and register for this webinar , in which LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® (that’s me) will be participating as comic relief, on the topic of the refusal to register “disparaging” trademarks such as REDSKINS and THE SLANTS under section 2(a) of the Lanham Act. It is going live on the ‘tubes at 1:00 Eastern time. Register and pay […]
Sorry about the pun — but then again, I’m not the PTO; then again, too, my attitude toward “scandalous and offensive” ethnic marks is different from that of lots of people, too. This one, in particular, has long rubbed me the wrong way. Regarding the Redskins appeal of the REDSKINS cancellation, here, courtesy of The […]
Originally posted 2006-08-26 23:12:00. Republished by Blog Post PromoterBad feelings from (not so?) long ago get played out across the China Straits. Just how much should trademark registration reflect personal, national, or ethnic sensibilities? This question continues to linger. But not in China. UPDATE: Looking for a post about the TTAB’s Redskins decision maybe?
Originally posted 2009-09-21 22:24:51. Republished by Blog Post Promoter Last week’s utterly unmissable topical tweets via @roncoleman: RT @ptolawyer: The TM case that won’t go away – Redskins case on way to SCOTUS: http://bit.ly/BJoq6 — See my http://bit.ly/P4NA3 RT @gfiremark Veoh wins copyright case, YouTube’s lawyers cheer http://bit.ly/3V2dpC RT @MegLG: Patent Troll Tracker defamation case goes to trial –http://ow.ly/pxXp […]
Originally posted 2005-12-22 23:56:10. Republished by Blog Post PromoterThere will always be an England, I guess, but the land once known for its stiff upper lip seems to be slouching along with the rest of us toward that slack-jawed permissiveness so popular among us Western infidels. The issue, of course, is FCUK. We first blogged […]
The question of whether consumers are likely to be confused is the signal inquiry that determines if a trademark infringement claim is valid. This blog is about trademark law, copyright law, free speech (mostly as it relates to the Internet) and legal issues related to blogging.
As for me, I'm a partner and commercial litigator at Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP with offices in New York and New Jersey (but active nationwide) and, some say, "IP maven"* with a special interest in copyright and trademark infringement involving the Internet--including advising clients how to avoid them.
For more information, or to learn more about retaining me, please click here.
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® is a registered trademark for blogs, and it's mine. And this is my very special privacy policy.
And see the bottom of this sidebar for the disclaimer... in case you're one of those.
There are all kinds of social media formats to subscribe or otherwise follow the adventures of LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION®. Or see the posts-by-email option below.
Follow @likely2confuse on Twitter
Is LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® really all that? Rankings-wise? Is it really one of the top law blogs in the galaxy?
It is, for what that's worth.
As of right now, here are the latest rankings via:
It's easy it is to game almost any ranking system, not that I've tried to. As such. These are just what they are.
THIS BLOG IS ONLY A BLOG, NOT LEGAL ADVICE. IT IS IN PART AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BY ME, RONALD D. COLEMAN, BUT I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. YOU ARE NOT MY CLIENT. JUST WALK BESIDE ME AND BE MY FRIEND.
*The term maven is used to mean "wise guy" here and is not meant to suggest that I am certified or otherwise authorized under bar rules to claim "expertise" in any field of legal practice. But try me.
