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: The Slants

Posted on April 20, 2022 Section 2(a)

A different Slant

Does this story in the Northwest Asian Weekly about the trademark registration woes of a rock band called The Slants sound familiar? The Slants, whose members... 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 December 23, 2021 Section 2(a)

43(a)? It’s not for me to say

I’m kind of tired of In re Tam also.  But I have been a bit surprised that there has not been a more discussion, or... Read more

Posted on November 20, 2021 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

Posted on November 17, 2021 Litigation

Posner’s “judicial interpretive updating” and the disparagement clause

Thank God for small favors.  Like being far away from the Seventh Circuit these days if you or your client want to rely on the... Read more

Posted on July 6, 2021July 7, 2021 Free Expression

“That one case”

Read more

Posted on June 11, 2021 Section 2(a)

THE SLANTS trademark: The CAFC reply brief

If you’re following the excitement, you’ve already bookmarked and, presumably, shared with all your friends our initial Federal Circuit brief filed in support of the... Read more

Posted on June 2, 2021 Section 2(a)

Free speech about trademarks and free speech

Speech about trademarks, trademark registrations and free speech have bubbled so verily to the top of the public imagination that it’s all over the official organ... Read more

Posted on June 2, 2021 Section 2(a)

Cigar-store repentance

< No one reading @likely2confuse in those days — it was a brand-new blog — and I did not anticipate that some day maybe a... Read more

Posted on May 28, 2021 Trademark registration

En Banc: Son of THE SLANTS Appeal Brief to the Federal Circuit

We’ve got your First Amendment right here: Props to my partner John Connell and associates Darth Newman and, of course, the redoubtable Joel MacMull — who... Read more

Posted on May 25, 2021 Section 2(a)

THE SLANTS trademark appeal: The other side

I posted the en banc Federal Circuit brief of Simon Tam for the Slants, and those of the amici curiae in his support shortly after... Read more

Posted on May 25, 2021 Section 2(a)

THE SLANTS — Federal Circuit brief

Originally posted 2014-04-22 21:57:06. Republished by Blog Post Promoter Read more

Posted on May 25, 2021 Section 2(a)

Formerly live, still video

Check out my boys John Connell and Joel MacMull on a “live” (well, it was live; now it’s un-alive) Facebook video talking about some darned... Read more

Posted on May 25, 2021 Section 2(a)

This is the last SLANTS song I’ll ever sing for you

For now. It was exciting last Friday, arguing the appeal of the THE SLANTS*, at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit!  A little... Read more

Posts navigation

1 2 3 4 →
  • 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
© 2022 LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™
 

Loading Comments...