Skip to content
LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

Ron Coleman on the law affecting 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

Tag: Charbucks

Posted on May 28, 2021 Trademark Dilution

Best of 2009: Char’ed, I’m sure

First posted December 8, 2009.  Poor Starbucks.  So much trademark trouble they have!  Other trouble, too.  And now the people who gave you five-dollar coffee in... Read more

Posted on January 3, 2014 Trademark Dilution

Blurring away

It really does appear that trademark dilution, once the darling of federal judges seeking to enforce trademark rights in gross on behalf of markholders whose... Read more

Posted on December 10, 2013December 17, 2013 Trademark Dilution

Absolutely flawed

Michael Atkins, the estimable Seattle Trademark Lawyer (true, there are others!), writes on the subject both Matthew and I have written about at length here:... Read more

Matthew David Brozik
Posted on November 19, 2013October 18, 2016 Trademark Dilution

Grande, Venti, De Novo. (Starbucks VI)

Last week, while one giant was vindicated after years of litigation—even if its name was spelled “Goggle” on page 2 of Judge Chin’s decision—another was... Read more

  • 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

Tweets by likely2confuse
© 2021 LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×