US Trademarks

Protecting your brand identity

TM Blog

Chinese WeChat Trademark Rejected

The Supreme Court of Beijing rejected the appeal of the trademark rejection of 微信 for WeChat. The court found that the mark described the service. In addition, the court found that there was insufficient evidence that there was correlation between the mark and the WeChat service for most consumers. The decision highlights the risks of selecting descriptive Chinese characters for a Chinese trademark.

Coca-Cola Wins "Zero" Trademarks

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has granted Coca-Cola trademarks for its ZERO branded softdrinks. Dr. Pepper had opposed the registration, arguing that ZERO was descriptive of zero calories. The TTAB found that ZERO had acquired distinctiveness and so could be registered. However, the TTAB did not grant Coca-Cola exclusive use of ZERO, and indicated that Dr. Pepper could register "Diet Rite Pure Zero."

USPTO Asks Supreme Court Overturn Federal Circuit "Disparaging" Ruling

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Federal Circuit's holding that denying trademark registration to disparaging marks is unconstitutional. The Federal Circuit ruled that the USPTO could not refuse registration to the mark "Slants" although it was disparaging. The ruling is pivotal in the ongoing battle over the "Redskins" trademark.

Apple Can't Block Alternate iPhone Registration in China

Chinese case manufacturer Xintong Tiandi was able to maintain its registration of the IPHONE mark in class 18, a registration that Apple appealed. Chinese trademark law does include a Famous Mark provision.  However, the Beijing Municipal High People's Court found that when Xintong Tiandi registered the MARK in 2007, iPhone was not yet a famous mark and so was only protected in Class 009 where it was originally registered.

Unlocking Mobile Phones Trademark Infringement

A federal court has found that unlocking or "jail breaking" mobile phones is trademark infringement. The finding was part of the Sprint v. Wireless One judgement.