Louisiana Law Blog

by James R. Chastain, Jr.

A jury in California issued a $6 million verdict against SLB Toys USA, Inc. (also known as ToyQuest) in favor of Wham-O, Inc., the manufacturer of the famous backyard yard toy, the Slip ‘N Slide. Wham-O owns two registrations for design marks for water slides which include the color yellow as part of the registration. Wham-O claimed that its famous yellow water slide has become an instantly recognizable iconic symbol of summer fun, and is famous among both children and adults.

by James R. Chastain, Jr.

On April 23, 2006, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation aired an episode of “Family Guy” entitled “Peterotica.” In this episode, Peter Griffin, who was an Archie Bunker-like character, enters a porn shop with his friends and comments that the porn shop is cleaner than he expected. One of Peter’s friends explains that Carol Burnett works part-time as a janitor. At this point, an animated character resembling the “Charwoman” from the Carol Burnett Show appears mopping the floor near several blow-up dolls and a rack of “XXX” movies. At this point, a slightly modified version of Carol Burnett’s theme song is playing in the background. One of Peter’s friends remarks, “You know, when she tugged her ear at the end of the show, she was really saying good night to her mom.” Another friend responded, “I wonder what she tugged to say good night to her dad?”

by Anthony G. Boone

The purpose of due diligence in the acquisition of licensing of intellectual property assets (namely patents and copyrights) is to give a buyer an opportunity to investigate and evaluate the asset concerned in some detail. More particularly, due diligence involving patens and copyrights can present ownership issues if the author/inventor is or was married and resides in a community property state. Whatever level of diligence is required for the particular transaction, the buyer should consider inquiring as to the current and past marital status of the inventor/author of the intellectual property if the inventor/author is either the seller; a direct owner of the seller; or in some cases, even a past owner of the intellectual property.

by James R. Chastain, Jr.

The Fifth Circuit recently addressed the issue of copyright ownership in its unreported decision in Pritchett v. Pound, civil action 05-41445 (5^th Cir. 2005). In 1981 Ronald Pound was hired by Pritchett, L.P., a business consulting firm founded by E. Price Pritchett. The employment contract provided that he was responsible for “completing regular written assignments and development of new products and procedures.”   It also stated that, “[s]hould the Employee produce any written materials in the course of his work with the Employer, then such shall be done for and on behalf of Employer and all work produced shall be the exclusive property of the Employer.” 

by James R. Chastain

The Dilution Statute was enacted as part of the Lanham Act in 1996. The Dilution Statute provides in 15 U.S.C. §1125(c) that the owner of a famous mark shall be entitled to an injunction against another person’s commercial use in commerce of a mark or trade name, if such use causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the mark and to obtain such other relief as provided in this subsection. The courts have been wrestling with the meaning of the terms in the Statute since that time.

On October 6, 2006, President Bush signed the Trademark Dilution Act of 2006 into law to further refine the applicability of the Statute and clarify many of the legal issues. Many of the provisions of the Act are important to note.

First, the Act retitles the cause of action to be for Dilution by Blurring and Dilution by Tarnishment. Presumably, this eliminates the possibility of another basis for claiming dilution. Blurring is defined as an association arising from the similarity between a mark and a famous mark that impairs the distinctiveness of the famous mark. Tarnishment is defined as an association that harms the famous mark’s reputation.

by Russel O. Primeaux

eBay is in litigation with a small company that claims that its patents cover the online auction method used by eBay. Blackberry users were a judge’s pen stroke away from an injunction that would have stopped all Blackberry use in the U.S. In that case, the patent owner, again a small company, claimed that the famous Star Trek type devices infringed the company’s patent. These patents might have been detected during a patent search, if eBay or Blackberry undertook such searches. This article will discuss each type of patent search, the cost, and the purpose.

Patentability Searches

Suppose your company develops a new product that appears to be innovative. You would like to obtain a patent if it is feasible. Before spending the money for a patent application (the initial filing cost could range from $8000 to $20,000), it may be wise to conduct a patentability search. The purpose of this search is to look through the issued patents and published patent applications at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) to find those patents which are relevant to the invention. Once you know of the existing patents, known as the prior art, you can make a better determination of your chances at obtaining a commercially viable patent. A patentability search and report can range from $500 to $2500, depending on (1) the complexity of the technology and (2) whether the results are reported in a formal opinion or are merely discussed in a meeting.

When a business selects a trademark under which a product or service will be sold, it hopes to develop brand loyalty among its customers and have them come to know the trademark in the market place. As part of the strategy to create a brand, it is prudent to seek federal trademark registration for the name in order to help protect the business' rights to use the trademark.

The Uniform Trade Secrets Act, La. 51:1431, et seq., provides a cause of action for misappropriation of a trade secret. However, it is important to recognize that these are specific terms which must be satisfied in order to trigger the remedies provided in the Act.

By Russel Primeaux

Someone once observed that most car accidents occur within 10 blocks of the driver's home. We see a analogous trend in Intellectual Property "crimes" - i.e. infringement of patents, trademarks, or copyrights; or misappropriation of a trade secret. Intellectual Property (IP) disputes between two parties that are strangers to one another are the exception, not the rule.

By Bill Caughman

In November 2003, the United States joined many other countries in signing a treaty called the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks (the "Madrid Protocol"). The United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") has just recently created forms and procedures to implement the Protocol in the United States. The Madrid Protocol is designed to provide a more efficient method for an owner of a trademark to register its trademark in a number of foreign countries.

By Lolly White

In-house counsel who are employed in Louisiana but are not licensed to practice law here have until July 1, 2005 to file an application for limited licensure to practice under the Louisiana Supreme Court's new In-House Counsel Rule.

By Russel O. Primeaux

It is a situation we see repeated all too often. A successful small business owner is considering a major expansion - either by franchising or by opening more company-owned offices. The business has many of the key ingredients for success. However, as we investigate the trademarks of the business, we learn of potential problems.

By Sonny Chastain

The Lanham Act was passed in 1946 pursuant to Congress' power to regulate commerce. Section 43 of the Act prohibits false and misleading advertising, stating that "any person who uses in commerce any false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which . . . in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is likely to be damaged by such an act." This section of the Act was at the center of a recent Listerine ad campaign.

By Russel O. Primeaux

In a given year, the average American teenager and young adult will spend 868 hours (36 days) online. Roughly 20 percent of this time is spent IM (IM). One recent study showed that of the 24 million U.S. teens that go online, one in five, or about 5 million, considers IM their primary means of communicating with their friends. Why are so may young Americans hooked on this technology? What can the American business man or woman learn from his/her son or daughter? If IM is such an important form of private communication in America, is there room for it in the American workplace? Can IM be an efficient and profitable means of conducting business? Or is IM just another type of electronic communication gadget along with e-mail, voice mail, paging, Blackberries, and cellular?