Tennessee IP Law Blog

Atari Interactive, Inc. v. Hyperkin Inc. , No. 219CV00608CASAFMX, 2020 WL 4287584 (C.D. Cal. July 27, 2020). https://www.logolounge.com/articles/the-origin-of-the-atari-logo PART I of III - Background Topic:     Trade Dress - Video Game Controllers I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Atari Interactive, Inc. (“Atari Interactive”) filed this action against defendant Hyperkin Inc. (“Hyperkin”) on January 25, 2019. Atari Interactive asserts claims for: (1) false designation of origin, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (2) common law unfair competition; and (3) trademark dilution, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). Hyperkin filed an answer on March 21, 2019. The gravamen of Atari Interactive's claims is that Hyperkin's videogame console and joystick controller infringe Atari Interactive's trade dress in Atari Interactive's own console and joystick controller. Hyperkin filed a motion for summary judgment on June 1, 2020, and a statement of uncontroverted facts and conclusions of l...

Blumenthal Distrib., Inc. v. Herman Miller, Inc. , No. 18-56471, 2020 WL 3458983 (9th Cir. June 25, 2020) https://design-middleeast.com/herman-millers-cosm-wins-red-dot-award-as-best-office-chair/ Topic: Trademarks - Trade Dress Functionality Takeaways: Arrangements of individual functional (non-protectable) elements in furniture can come together to create a nonfunctional appearance that is protectable. "Household name" level of fame is required to make a claim for trade dress dilution for 9th Circuit under Thane v. Trek Herman Miller, Inc. (“HM”) sells Eames chairs and Aeron chairs. On December 13, 2013, HM sent a cease-and-desist letter to Blumenthal Distributing, Inc., d/b/a Office Star Products (“OSP”), accusing OSP of selling “knockoff” chairs that look like HM's Eames and Aeron chairs. The letter alleged infringement of HM's rights in the EAMES and AERON trade dresses under the Lanham Act. Litigation ensued, culminating in a jury trial on ...

Brantley v. Epic Games, Inc. , No. 8:19-CV-594-PWG, 2020 WL 2794016, at *12 (D. Md. May 29, 2020) This post is a Part II/II of a discussion of Brantley v. Epic Games . Part I discusses the Plaintiffs' Copyright claims , Part II addresses Plaintiffs Trademark claims. https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/terps-show-off-running-man-challenge-dance-on-ellen-show/79982/ Topic: Copyright Preemption of the Lanham Act, Trademark Infringement, Dilution, False Endorsement, Dastar Takeaways: Alleging confusion as to the "person or entity that originated the ideas or communications that ‘goods [or services]’ embody or contain" rather than confusion as to the "producer of the product sold" fails to establish a Lanham Act claim under Dastar . A trademark must identify a unique good or service, therefore a trademark cannot be in itself a good or service, (i.e. the Running Man Dance cannot be a trademark for performances of the Running Man Dance.) Unlike t...

Compulife Software Inc. v. Newman , No. 18-12004, 2020 WL 2549505 (11th Cir. May 20, 2020) Topic:  Abstraction/Filtration Anaylsis & Burden Shifting Takeaway:  After an infringement plaintiff has demonstrated that he holds a valid copyright and that the defendant engaged in factual copying, the defendant bears the burden of proving—as part of the filtration analysis—that the elements he copied from a copyrighted work are unprotectable. Overall, this is a very in depth and complicated case that involves multiple aspects of IP law. As such, this post is limited to the issue of copyright infringement and protectability under the abstraction/filtration test. Check back next week for part 2 regarding the trade-secret issues! naaip.org/logo             compulife.com Background & Parties There’s nothing easy about this case. The facts are complicated, and the governing law is tangled. At its essence, it’s a case about h...