“People may be joint inventors even though they do not physically work on the invention together or at the same time, and even though each does not make the same type or amount of contribution.” Falana v. Kent State Univ., 669 F.3d 1349, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2012). “The interplay between conception and collaboration requires that […]
The existence of third-party registrations for similar goods or services can bear on a mark’s conceptual strength. Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enters. LLC, 794 F.3d 1334, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Specifically, third-party registrations containing an element that is common to both the opposer’s and the applicant’s marks can show that that element has “a […]
In Jason Scott Collection, Inc. v. Trendily Furniture, LLC, No. 21-16978, — F.4th — (9th Cir. May 30, 2023), the Ninth Circuit recently reiterated that copyright and trademark claims are not mutually exclusive. See, e.g., Wal-Mart Stores v. Samara Bros., 529 U.S. 205, 208 (2000) (involving claims for both copyright and trade dress infringement); Art […]
Sometimes an artist’s name may “simply identify the source of the performance contained on the record,” which is not enough to establish that the artist’s name functions as a mark for the recording. In re Polar Music Int’l AB, 714 F.2d 1567, 221 USPQ 315, 318 (Fed. Cir. 1983); see also In re Spirer, 225 […]
A trade secret must derive independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use. 18 U.S.C. § 1839(3)(B). Also, a trade secret must be the subject of efforts that are reasonable […]