Articles Tagged with IP

Image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Apple published a roundabout apology today (see below) after losing an appeal in the British courts over a lawsuit claiming that some Samsung tablets infringed the registered design of the Cupertino, California, company’s iPad.

The publication notice was made to comply with an earlier July 18, 2012, ruling by a lower court requiring Apple to publish, at its own expense, a link and explanation to the judgment rendered by HHJ Birss QC on July 9, 2012.

The apology listed below was issued after an iPad-toting British judge upheld a lower court finding that three different Samsung tablet computers “do not infringe Apple’s registered design No. 000181607-0001.”

The phrase ‘registered design’ refers to a legal status conferred by the UK’s Intellectual Property Office for “grant[ing] exclusive rights in the look and appearance of your product.”

Sir Robin Jacob, who wrote the judgment for the panel of three British Court of Appeal judges who heard and decided the case, candidly disclosed that he has an Apple iPad (“I own one”).

On July 19th, Rick Quereshi filed a Notice of Opposition against Twitter’s application for the mark TWEET.  Although Twitter applied for trademark protection of TWEET back on April 16, 2009, and the application was published for opposition later that year, Quereshi opposes the registration for the following reasons: 1) Twitter filed its application under an intent to use basis, yet no Allegation of Use has been filed to date; 2) Twitter has not used the TWEET mark in commerce with the identified classes of services from the application; and 3) Quereshi has been openly and notoriously using the TWEET mark in commerce via a mobile computing device since July 23, 2009.  Thus, under the doctrine of common law, Quereshi claims ownership of the mark TWEET due to its prior senior use.

Can gaming company Zynga successfully obtain trademark rights to all things ending in ville, the French word for a town or village?

Answering that question is a task facing two federal courts.

Before it launched its billion dollar IPO, the San Francisco-based tech company threatened to sue computer game makers for having product names containing the ‘ville’ suffix.

Rather than accede to Zynga’s demands, game makers in West Virginia and Texas preemptively sued Zynga for court declarations that their game names — Blingville and Dungeonville — do not infringe any of the company’s trademark rights.

There’s a bitter legal feud in the Wild Yonder out West. The trademark fighter pilot litigators at two telecoms are fueling their IP jets, checking their legal payloads, and heading for a showdown over the clear blue skies of eastern California and northern Nevada.

Carlsbad, California-based ViaSat^®, owner of Yonder mobile broadband, fired the first salvo, launching a service mark infringement lawsuit against Yonder Wireless, a Reno, Nevada-based rural broadband provider. The legal filing contains a number of other claims in this business dispute. (Read the full text of the lawsuit below)