Skip to content
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

Lawyer Ron Coleman on brands, the Internet & free speech

  • Legal standards for likelihood of confusion
  • Home
  • Video
  • Publications
    • Play-Doh’s trademark registration passes the smell test
    • Social Media and Proving Secondary Meaning
    • Slants, Redskins and other “Disparaging” Trademarks
    • Bully for Who? How trademark bullying works
    • Copycats on the Superhighway
    • Prudential Standing: Who is ‘Any Person’ Under the Lanham Act?
    • Hacker with a White Hat
    • Trademark, Copyright, and the Internet: Time to Return Balance to Civil Litigation
    • Hands off blogs: Mandatory disclosure of “blogola”?
    • Bloggers, Journalists, Reporting and Privilege
    • “Initial Interest Confusion”: Compounding the Error
  • More
    • Privacy Policy
    • Opposition brief of Gavin McInnes to motion to dismiss by SPLC
    • Statutory damages in copyright cases
    • A Theory of Trademarks in the Blog Era
      • Managing Risk: Litigation Prophylaxis in High-Tech Agreements
    • I’m high-ranked and I know it
    • The Endless Summer: Student Lawyer magazine, March 1989
    • Asymmetric Cultural Warfare
    • Blawg Review #2 (April 17, 2005)
    • Copycats on the Superhighway
    • The Endless Summer: Student Lawyer magazine, March 1989
  • Motions to Dismiss
  • Bio and Contact

Category: Section 2(a)

Posted on September 20, 2019 Section 2(a)

TTAB re THE SLANTS trademark: Once disparaging, always disparaging

Remember the SLANTS trademark appeal to the TTAB?  Here’s the decision (below). For the TTAB, there’s only one answer to the “disparaging” question — well,... Read more

Posted on September 20, 2019July 18, 2023 Section 2(a)

Jiggering it out at the PTO

Originally published on September 21, 2009. Oh, to be a hip, Jewish intellectual… property owner.  Stick with me here. A while back I was following... Read more

Posted on August 21, 2019 Section 2(a)

Slanted against him

Another not-safe-for-work story is out there about a trademark registration denied under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act as “immoral or scandalous.”  John Welch and Marc... Read more

Posted on December 18, 2018 Section 2(a)

Reply brief on en banc hearing in the Federal Circuit for The Slants

Previous related documents: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sua sponte order to vacate The Slants en banc Appellate Brief Briefs of the PTO... Read more

Posted on August 25, 2017February 3, 2021 Section 2(a)

Friday in Washington with a dozen of my closest friends

Tune in to hear @theslants lawyer @RonColeman say: “Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act is unconstitutional on its face” https://t.co/whj9oI8EjO — Ed Timberlake (@TimberlakeLaw) October... Read more

Posted on June 20, 2017October 15, 2017 Section 2(a)

The Slants: Denouement

Victory has a hundred fathers https://t.co/G9Z7QOVH8l — Likelihood ®© Blog (@likely2confuse) June 19, 2017 Now let’s name some of them.  Because while I have many... Read more

Posted on March 2, 2017 Section 2(a)

Cleveland rocks!

Now I have been to Cleveland a couple of times and I can’t say I actually saw this rocking take place.  I mean, this whole... Read more

Posted on December 9, 2016 Section 2(a)

Lee v. Tam (“The SLANTS Case”): Brief for Respondent Simon Shiao Tam

Filed today. Read more

Posted on September 29, 2016 Section 2(a)

In re Tam – Simon Tam’s Response to the PTO’s Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and grant of cert news

The Supreme Court granted the PTO’s request for cert in In re Tam (the “Slants case”).  Here’s a good summary of the case and our position... Read more

Posted on March 21, 2016June 24, 2017 Section 2(a)

“Indian givers” (part 2)

[Note: This post was written before the December 22, 2015 Federal Circuit opinion in In re Tam, and, of course, subsequent developments.] Yesterday I ended part... Read more

Posted on December 27, 2015July 18, 2023 Section 2(a)

So, how about those Redskins?

I’ve been writing about the Redskins and the tribulations — and, as it turns out, trials — of their REDSKINS trademarks since long before that... Read more

Posted on July 8, 2015July 10, 2015 Section 2(a)

Another bad season for the Redskins

The Eastern District of Virginia has ruled (link to opinion here) on the summary judgment motions in Pro Football v. Blackhorse in the NFL’s appeal to the District... Read more

Posted on April 20, 2015April 29, 2015 Section 2(a)

Federal Circuit on the THE SLANTS: [Updated]

 [stextbox id=”alert” caption=”Our new world — and welcome to it”] UPDATE: When this post was written, the world we lived in was one particular kind... Read more

Posted on January 26, 2015July 18, 2023 Section 2(a)

Best of 2009: Jiggering it out at the PTO

First posted January 29, 2009. Oh, to be a hip, Jewish intellectual… property owner. Stick with me here. A while back I was following the... Read more

Posts navigation

← 1 2 3 4 5 →
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Corporate Censorship in Social Media and a Role for the States

Ron Coleman of the DHILLON LAW GROUP

Click the pic for more information - admitted in New York and New Jersey

This blog

The question of whether consumers are likely to be confused is the signal inquiry that determines if a trademark infringement claim is valid. I write here about trademark law, copyright law, brands, free speech (mostly as it relates to the Internet and social media). That may sound like a lot, but it's just a blog.

PODCAST

ColemanNation

Commercial, Trademark and Free Speech Litigation at DHILLON LAW GROUP

https://youtu.be/iC2nZPc_THs

LIKELIHOOD OF ACCUMULATION

CATEGORIES (Still in progress…)

DISCLAIMER

THIS BLOG IS ONLY A BLOG, NOT LEGAL ADVICE. IT IS IN PART AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BY RONALD D. COLEMAN, AN ATTORNEY ADMITTED IN NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY ONLY, WHO IS NOT YOUR LAWYER. YOU ARE NOT HIS CLIENT. JUST WALK BESIDE HIM AND BE HIS FRIEND.

This is my very special privacy policy.

THIS WEBSITE MAY BE CONSIDERED ATTORNEY ADVERTISING, DAMN IT

© 2023 LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™
 

Loading Comments...