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

Search Results for: Redskins

Posted on December 12, 2022 Section 2(a)

Best of 2014: Redskins decision: The present judges the past

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... Read more

Posted on April 29, 2022 Section 2(a)

Redskins redux

Remember the Washington Redskins trademark tussle? CNBC reports that it’s back — again — and better than ever. This time the focus is an interesting... Read more

Posted on April 1, 2022 Section 2(a)

“Rock ‘n Roll, Redskins & Free Speech”

I have tried not to overload the blog with media coverage about our Supreme Court case involving THE SLANTS, but this is pretty ginchy: Originally... Read more

Posted on October 26, 2021 Section 2(a)

Redskins redux 2

I 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... Read more

Posted on May 28, 2021 Section 2(a)

The Redskins appeal brief in Pro-Football v. Blackhorse

Originally posted 2015-10-31 20:54:47. Republished by Blog Post Promoter Read more

Posted on May 24, 2021 Section 2(a)

Trademarks, the Redskins and the constitution

The NFL’s brief on the issue you’ve read about everywhere, including here, is now out and about (courtesy of John Welch): NFL v Blackhorse – The... Read more

Slants, Redskins and other “Disparaging” Trademarks

This article, based in part on a LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® post entitled “How about those Redskins,” was first published in the December 2015 MLRC MediaLawLetter. Item,... Read more

Posted on December 27, 2015April 28, 2016 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 July 14, 2014 Section 2(a)

Redskins’ intractable trademark troubles — or sportswriters’?

I’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... Read more

Posted on June 18, 2014July 1, 2014 Section 2(a)

Redskins decision: The present judges the past

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... Read more

Posted on September 2, 2008June 25, 2014 Section 2(a)

Football Redskins live to fight another day

This story won’t die — especially judging from the prominence of related words among search terms that reach this blog.  The latest, which we missed... Read more

Posted on January 7, 2023 Section 2(a)

Indian givers (part 3)

Part one and part two of this three-part post were published earlier this week. When the PTO’s decision revoking the REDSKINS registrations was affirmed by... Read more

Posted on January 2, 2023 Section 2(a)

The ACLU’s strange bedfellows

Here’s some news:  The American Civil Liberties Union says the Redskins are wrong, damned wrong — but they’ve got every right in the world to... Read more

Posts navigation

1 2 3 →
  • 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...