• Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

~ Trademark and Copyright Law Updates in Indiana

Indiana Intellectual Property Blog

Tag Archives: Trademark Infringement

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Sensory Technologies v. Sensory Technology Consultants

29 Wednesday May 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Declaratory Judgment, Denise K. LaRue, False Designation of Origin, Litigation Update, Permanent Injunction, Preliminary Injunction, Sarah Evans Barker, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Sensory overload!

This is a fairly standard trademark dispute over the trademark “Sensory Technologies” in connection with audio-visual and video conferencing systems. Sensory Indiana (Plaintiff) is suing Sensory Utah (Defendant) after months of notice letters went unanswered. We’ll see if the lawsuit merits a response.

Sensory Technologies, LLC v. Sensory Technology Consultants, Inc.

Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00834-SEB-DKL
File Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Plaintiff: Sensory Technologies, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Jonathan G. Polak, Tracy N. Betz of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
Defendant: Sensory Technology Consultants, Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, False Designation of Origin, Unfair Competition, Declaratory Judgment, Preliminary Injunction, Permanent Injunction
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Sarah Evans Barker
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Denise K. LaRue

View this document on Scribd

Indiana Judge: Dark Knight Rises didn’t infringe on CLEAN SLATE trademark

20 Monday May 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Batman, Christopher A. Nuechterlein, Common Law Unfair Competition, First Amendment, Litigation Update, Philip P. Simon, Reverse Confusion, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Judge Philip Simon has ruled that Warner Bros.’s “The Dark Knight Rises” did not infringe on the trademarked name of a computer security program, Clean Slate. As a brief recap, Plaintiff Fortres Grand, an Indiana corporation, has sold security software under the mark CLEAN SLATE since 2000. In Defendant Warner Bros’ latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises, Batman promises to obtain a software program called “Clean Slate” that will erase a person’s criminal history from every computer database in the world. This apparently caused hundreds of internet references for the fictional movie software, to which Plaintiff objected, prompting the lawsuit.

Nevertheless, Judge Simon has found no trademark infringement, focusing his opinion (full Opinion and Order below) largely on the doctrine of “reverse confusion.” I’ve provided a few excerpts from the Opinion below but you’ll want to read the full text for the Court’s complete reverse confusion analysis. The Court also rules that Warner Bros.’s use of the term “Clean Slate” is protected by the First Amendment.

There’s an obvious problem with Fortres Grand’s argument that this is a worst-case scenario of reverse confusion: Warner Bros. “clean slate” software only exists in the fictional world of Gotham; it does not exist in reality. This may seem to be a small point, but it has big ramifications for the consumer confusion analysis, which become apparent once you realize the argument that Fortres Grand has not made – and cannot make.

Here, there is simply no plausible claim that consumers will make “mistaken purchasing decisions” about the “tangible product” being sold in the marketplace: no one looking for Fortres Grand’s software is likely to mistakenly buy a ticket to The Dark Knight Rises.

Opinion and Order:

View this document on Scribd

 

 

[View the original Complaint.]

Fortres Grand Corporation v. Warner Bros Entertainment Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:12-cv-00535-PPS-CAN
File Date: Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Plaintiff: Fortres Grand Corporation
Plaintiff Counsel: Christopher R. Putt of May Oberfell Lorber
Defendant: Warner Bros Entertainment Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Common Law Unfair Competition
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Chief Judge Philip P. Simon
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Christopher A. Nuechterlein

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Master Cutlery v. Pacific Solution Marketing

18 Saturday May 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Southern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Copyright Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Counterfeiting, Debra McVicker Lynch, False Advertising, False Designation of Origin or Sponsorship, Jane Magnus-Stinson, Litigation Update, Theft, Trade Dress Infringement, Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition

Master Cutlery, Inc. v. Pacific Solution Marketing, Inc.

Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00819-JMS-DML
File Date: Friday, May 17, 2013
Plaintiff: Master Cutlery, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Darlene R. Seymour Attorney at Law
Defendant: Pacific Solution Marketing, Inc.
Cause: Trademark Infringement, Copyright Infringement, Trademark Dilution, False Designation of Origin or Sponsorship, False Advertising, Trade Dress Infringement, Common Law Copyright Infringement, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Theft, Counterfeiting
Court: Southern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch

View this document on Scribd

Trial Scheduled for Indiana’s First Keyword Advertising Case

09 Thursday May 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Bloggers, Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Social Media, Tech Developments, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Angie's List, Common Law Unfair Competition, Keyword Advertising, Litigation Update, Request for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, Sarah Evans Barker, Tim A. Baker, Trade Disparagement, Trademark Dilution, Trademark Infringement, Unfair Competition, Unjust Enrichment

Indiana’s first keyword advertising case is now set for trial. However, don’t hold your breath if you’re waiting for an answer to whether the purchase and use of a competitor’s trademark in keyword advertising is trademark infringement. The Angie’s List/ServiceMagic trial won’t take place for over a year.

On May 6, a Scheduling Order set a bench trial for October 6, 2014 (at 9:30 AM in Room #216, United States Courthouse, 46 E. Ohio Street, Indianapolis, Indiana before Judge Sarah Evans Barker). A settlement conference was held  between the parties in February 2013 but no settlement was reached. Based on the importance of this question to the parties involved, I expect this case to go to trial, however long that may take.

In the meantime, you can review the Answer to Complaint and Answer to Counterclaims below. Stay tuned for updates.

DEFENDANT SERVICEMAGIC, INC.’S ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS:

View this document on Scribd

ANGIE’S LIST’S ANSWER TO SERVICEMAGIC’S COUNTERCLAIMS:

View this document on Scribd

Indiana Trademark Litigation Update – Manchester University v. Sportswear

24 Wednesday Apr 2013

Posted by Kenan Farrell in Indiana, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Northern District of Indiana, Trademark

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Law Trademark Infringement, Common Law Unfair Competition, False Description, False Designation of Origin, False Representation, Litigation Update, Robert L. Miller, Roger B. Cosbey, Trademark Infringement

Manchester University Inc v. Sportswear Inc

Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00120-RLM-RBC
File Date: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Plaintiff: Manchester University Inc
Plaintiff Counsel: D Randall Brown of Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Defendant: Sportswear Inc
Cause: Trademark Infringement; False Designation of Origin, False Description, and/or False Representation; Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition,
Court: Northern District of Indiana
Judge: Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Roger B. Cosbey

View this document on Scribd
← Older posts
Newer posts →

Categories

  • Advertising Law (1)
  • Artists (23)
  • Authors (20)
  • Bloggers (37)
  • Branding (29)
  • Business Law (9)
  • Copyright (327)
  • Dear KLF Legal (4)
  • Defamation (5)
  • Entertainment Law (14)
  • Estate Law (2)
  • Family Law (2)
  • Fashion (5)
  • Federal Initiatives (33)
  • Indiana (603)
  • Indianapolis (51)
  • Intellectual Property (662)
  • Just for Fun (25)
  • KLF Legal (19)
  • Legislation (34)
  • Litigation (595)
  • Musicians (13)
  • Nonprofit (6)
  • Northern District of Indiana (215)
  • Patent (44)
  • Privacy (15)
  • Right of Publicity (8)
  • Social Media (56)
  • Southern District of Indiana (369)
  • Stories from the Week that Was (42)
  • Supreme Court (13)
  • Tech Developments (119)
  • Trade Dress (26)
  • Trade Secret (15)
  • Trademark (363)
  • What I'm Reading (8)

Bloggers Copyright Federal Initiatives Indiana Indianapolis Intellectual Property Legislation Litigation Northern District of Indiana Patent Social Media Southern District of Indiana Stories from the Week that Was Tech Developments Trademark

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Indiana Intellectual Property Blog
    • Join 81 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Indiana Intellectual Property Blog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar