Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Ensuring consumers can find quality adult, umm, toys

The Smitten Kitten Inc., a Minneapolis-based marketer of adult sex toys, has initiated a trademark infringement lawsuit against a Cincinnati man operating an online sex toy business. 

The suit claims that Mike Fernandez (doing business as Sex Toys Revolutions), has since 2008 used website URLs with the Smitten Kitten name, infringing on the Minneapolis firm’s 2006 trademark. The trademark’s specifics are listed below:

Word Mark
THE SMITTEN KITTEN A TRULY FEMINIST SEX TOY STORE

Goods and Services
IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: Retail stores featuring sex toys, books and videos. FIRST USE: 20030602. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20030602

Mark Drawing Code
(3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code
03.01.04 - Cats, domestic Cats; Kittens
26.11.21 - Rectangles that are completely or partially shaded


The suit claims Fernandez’ use of the name causes confusion to consumers and “creates the false and misleading impression that (Smitten Kitten) sponsors or otherwise approves of his use of the mark, and/or endorses or profits from the products and services marketed.” 


A quick Google of “smitten kitten” shows the plaintiff’s website as the first result, but it would be interesting to know how far back Mr. Fernandez’s use of the term goes, as trademark rights accrue through use, regardless of whether the mark is federally registered.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Apple wants to know if you are master of your domain

Apple Inc. has just been granted US 7,800,592 for “Hand held electronic device with multiple touch sensing devices” that use sensors to determine the users’ identity based upon they way they hold it. Claim 1 is below:

A handheld device, comprising: a sensor arrangement comprising a grid of capacitive sensing points configured to generate a pixilated image of a hand of a user in contact with the handheld device; and a controller configured to determine an identity of the user based on the pixilated image of the user's hand generated by the sensor arrangement, and configure the handheld device in response to the identity determination according to user settings stored in a user profile associated with the determined identity.

Apparently the idea is to personalize the user-input locations (i.e. buttons, etc.) and settings based upon the way you grip the device. This sounds pretty cool, but all you miscreants may still prefer Android phones- remember Steve Jobs recently dropped this gem:

“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone. Folks who want porn can buy [an] Android phone.”

The folks in Mountain View are watching . . .

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Florida State University On The Warpath

Like many institutions of higher education, FSU employs Collegiate Licensing Co., an Atlanta-based that represents approximately 160 other shools, to protect its trademarks such as SEMINOLES from unauthorized use. Apparently, unauthorized use includes an Ohio high school.

Jerry Calder, the principal of Monroe Central High School in southeastern Ohio, said the school has been known as the Seminoles since it formed as a merger of to smaller schools in 1994. In 1994 FSU had just won a college football national championship. Principal Calder thought it was a joke when he received a letter telling him that FSU took issue with his school's logos.

The principal said he assumed that FSU would be excited about a team in Ohio- home of football power Ohio State University, calling itself the Seminoles.

"It's the most sincere form of flattery,'' according to Calder. "Here's a school in Ohio picking the Seminoles. There is no way we could affect any marketing or anything that deals with Florida State. In our area, it might even help Florida State.''

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Stevie Wonder just called to say he doesn’t love you

On September 20th he appeared before the U.N.'s 184-nation World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) on behalf of blind folks who want to "read their way into light," and opined that the current copyright system denies them an equal opportunity. During his talk, Wonder stated, " . . . please work it out. Or I'll have to write a song about what you didn't do."

At issue is the current legal copyright landscape which results in institutes for the blind in various countries being required at times to make multiple audiobook versions of the same work, according to Richard Owens, WIPO's director of copyright and electronic commerce. Owens asserts that this can limit access to blind and partially blind people in poor countries, which often cannot afford to create their own versions of books concerning everything from science to entertainment.

The U.N. agency has been trying to modernize its global copyright framework to better account for new media, including audio books. The goal is to create a clearinghouse for the visually-impaired such that published materials can be traded around the world and translated into new, readable formats without the costs inherent to the current system.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

That'll learn 'em

It is against the law to mark a product as patented if the product is not in fact covered by the claims of an issued, non-expired patent. Patent Group LLC, of Tyler, Texas is making sure that holders of expired patents understand this, as the firm is bringing lawsuits against companies who apparently have failed to remove the “patented” notification from their products.

So far, the firm has brought several lawsuits involving fishing lures and other fishing-related products.

Apparently, the lawsuits are permissible under US Code, Section 292 of Title 35, which allows the plaintiff to collect one-half of any penalty assessed to the defendant, with such penalties not exceeding $500 per offense.

Monday, September 20, 2010

"The invention" vs. "embodiments of the invention"

Though there are probably some arguments against this technique, I usually prefer to use "embodiments of the invention" rather than "the invention" when drafting an application.

As with many aspects of drafting, it is often better to keep your description as non-limiting as possible. By stating exactly what "the invention" is you are providing the examiner (or, perhaps an infringer) language that limits your invention.

So, rather than:

" . . . the invention is a red ball."

it is often better to write:

" . . . embodiments of the invention include a red ball."

Happy Drafting, and remember this is not legal advice. If you have questions about any specific case it is best to check with a registered patent attorney.