[E-trademarks] Dealing with copycat

Sun Dec 17 11:48:03 EST 2023

Oppose the application if you still can. Otherwise, petition to cancel it.

— Maria Crimi Speth, Jaburg Wilk
________________________________
From: E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Edward Timberlake via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2023 7:15:03 AM
To: For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Edward Timberlake <ed at timberlakelaw.com>; Daniel Kegan <dkegan at bhhlawfirm.com>
Subject: Re: [E-trademarks] Dealing with copycat

One area (among many) to be careful about is not jumping to conclusions about real world behaviors based solely on statements made in a registration (or applications for registration) context.

For instance, if an application for registration shows a "first use" of January 1st, 2023, that doesn't necessarily mean the mark wasn't in use before January 1st, 2023. It's simply an assertion that the mark was in use in commerce in connection with the goods at least as early as January 1st, 2023. For all we know, this owner may have been using this mark in connection with these goods in the 1950's. Or they may not actually be using the mark in commerce in connection with the goods at all.

Similarly, an application for registration of a trademark filed on a 1(b) (intent to use) basis is not the same thing as conclusive evidence the mark was not in use as of the filing date. The real world and registration world are (ideally) closely connected, but it would be a mistake to assume one perfectly mirrors the other.

Also, for the purposes of trademark use (in either a registration or real world context), it can be difficult to know what evidence somebody else has showing use of a mark in commerce. While we might somewhat reasonably assume somebody selling shirts would want to do so on the largest scale possible (such as a website), a very modest amount of evidence (such as a photo of a shirt on a table a farmer's market) might be enough to cause common law trouble (and could easily precede a website by many years).

Basically, it's tempting (but can be unwise) to assume to many real world facts based on statements or evidence in a filing context.

Another factor to consider is whether anybody else is currently using a similar mark in a related commercial space. If only two people in the world are using this or similar marks, it might be easier to characterize one as "original" and the other as "copycat." The existence of other people also using similar marks would complicate such a characterization.

Typically, the faster, easier solution in trademark matters is to be the person who has a live federal trademark registration (and more money?) when the other party doesn't. Absent such an advantage, one is often left to the messy, old, often expensive methods (the shortcomings of which were part of the motivation for setting up such a registration system in the first place).

Sincerely,

Ed Timberlake
Board Certified Specialist in Trademark Law<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=nclawspecialists.gov&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubmNsYXdzcGVjaWFsaXN0cy5nb3YvZm9yLXRoZS1wdWJsaWMvZmluZC1hLWJvYXJkLWNlcnRpZmllZC1zcGVjaWFsaXN0L3Jlc3VsdHMvZGV0YWlsLz9pZD0yOTQ3Mw==&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=T1dNMHZTVGZXaFZPYUtnRXVJZ0RyVVV3MnJMYm5CSThlVXhBM2ZNNW4yVT0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>

Timberlake Law<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=timberlakelaw.com&u=aHR0cDovL3RpbWJlcmxha2VsYXcuY29tLw==&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=NDFoaFZSRS9HNUhTeWR2dzFRT3BOZ1BNTWhkSWMzSkIvdVVCM3JaMFhWdz0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>
Chapel Hill, NC

Schedule a call on Clarity<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=clarity.fm&u=aHR0cHM6Ly9jbGFyaXR5LmZtL2VkdGltYmVybGFrZQ==&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=Ukd5WXRzSmF6YWVaZ3BsQ1BWZGQzZHdaN09TZmhZcEw4aVB1U1R3cWRJbz0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>
ed at timberlakelaw.com<mailto:ed at timberlakelaw.com>
919.960.1950

[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4yqPkLcW3Y31kc85P6RS7NWfcWrwuOgQLDSt1RcISuArSpo9OMPIPpEM0gaFcPeg00KJcaNlw0]

On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 10:33 AM Daniel Kegan via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
A single mark on a Tshirt raises possibility it is ornamentation, not mark
Unless your client sells web services, it does not “use mark for website” but perhaps on web site.
Question of what are the client’s goods and services is first that came to mine.
Second, you want to closely monitor TSDR for how adverse application progresses.
Fast, Cheap, Quality are an inherent trinity: yu can get two, not all three;
Faster resolution is easy at more expense—
but need to ensure all your ducks are nicely in row.
Fast to lose is not a great outcome.
Others likely have additional suggestions.

Daniel Kegan *  847-452-2599
Baron Harris Healey, Of Counsel
<DKegan at BHHLawFirm.com>
<http://www.BHHLawFirm.com<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=bhhlawfirm.com&u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5CSEhMYXdGaXJtLmNvbQ==&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=bk5laHVZS2ZFU1pkbnl1WW40OXp2ZHNQR2RYbGYxT0NMa1VsR2kxZzJ3az0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>>
Balanced Counsel for Smart Clients®
29 Kendal Dr
Kennett Square PA 19348-2323 USA

On Dec 16, 2023, at 5:26 AM, Bill Ramos via E-trademarks <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
Still learning the ins & outs of this practice and have learned so much sitting on the sidelines reading everyone's posts - Thank you.
I have a predicament. Any suggestions?

Client has been using mark for years for website and clothing line.
Client finally got around to filing to register the mark.
A month before client came to me, a copycat filed to register the same mark.
Copycat shows a single webpage named almost the same as clients with a single t-shirt bearing client's mark.
Copycat started using the mark just a month before filing so client has common law on his side.
Any suggestions on handling this copycat sooner rather than later?
I already sent a cease & desist which copycat ignored.
TIA =}

William D. Ramos, Esq.
Ramos Law, P.A.
Estate Planning
Wills, Trusts, Powers of Attorney
Trademark Registrations

Office: 919-200-0377
www.BillRamosLaw.com<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=ramoslaw.net&u=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5yYW1vc2xhdy5uZXQv&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=VWZxbTZUL3RqbjRaOSt4MmxtOTkvU2JHaFZJZk96OXk5MGNGbWxuVjk4ST0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>

Admitted to Practice Law in the State of North Carolina and The United States District Courts of the Eastern & Middle Districts of North Carolina.

NOTICE: Communications of any kind with an attorney or staff member at Ramos Law, P.A. do not create an attorney-client relationship nor constitute the provision of legal advice. You do not become a client of Ramos Law, P.A. unless you enter into a written agreement describing the legal work to be done that is signed by you and attorney William D. Ramos.

This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the intended addressee or authorized to receive for the intended addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply at info at BillRamosLaw.com<mailto:info at BillRamosLaw.com> and delete the message.

--
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=oppedahl-lists.com&u=aHR0cDovL29wcGVkYWhsLWxpc3RzLmNvbS9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2UtdHJhZGVtYXJrc19vcHBlZGFobC1saXN0cy5jb20=&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=WDJZQWlMZWVleXQrUFl5OWdyQzZZbU52UHk0VDcxeHRYY2JDQ2tNQ1RJVT0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>

--
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com<https://us-east-2.protection.sophos.com?d=oppedahl-lists.com&u=aHR0cDovL29wcGVkYWhsLWxpc3RzLmNvbS9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2UtdHJhZGVtYXJrc19vcHBlZGFobC1saXN0cy5jb20=&i=NWZjN2IzODdkNTFiOTUwZGY5Zjc2ZThl&t=WDJZQWlMZWVleXQrUFl5OWdyQzZZbU52UHk0VDcxeHRYY2JDQ2tNQ1RJVT0=&h=a1cd31f902eb4d51bfc92da0ce3d3794&s=AVNPUEhUT0NFTkNSWVBUSVaTTxKQ49wv4eSgzjbXRsG3NSCRu3Vh0ZXA6WVIHZ009RUFnH9mAa-JBMM2M0B4Cj0>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231217/61f75973/attachment.htm>