The Legal Equivalents Test: Bollywood and Hollywood
The Legal Equivalents Test: Bollywood and Hollywood
Emily Whitaker, William and Mary intern
When Nielsen Business Media, Inc. filed two intent-to-use applications for the mark THE BOLLYWOOD REPORTER, the USPTO refused the registration because the mark was deemed “merely descriptive.” Nielsen Media protested this refusal, and the TTAB made its ruling on January 28th (in re Nielsen Media, Inc., Serial Nos. 77/223,725, 77/223,728). This decision set important precedent for what is required for two marks to be deemed legal equivalents.
The BOLLYWOOD REPORTER provides news updates on the Indian motion-picture industry, and Nielsen media sought to register the mark for “newspapers in the field of entertainment” and for “providing online publications in the nature of newspapers in the field of entertainment.” In response to rejection of these applications, Nielsen Media protested based on the fact that they also own the registration for the mark THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER, which provides similar services and good as THE BOLLYWOOD REPORTER.
They attempted to argue that these two marks were legal equivalents. Citing Section 2(f) of the
Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. §1052(f) they said that THE BOLLYWOOD REPORTER is not merely descriptive because it has required distinctiveness based on the previous registration of THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER. By arguing on these grounds, Nielsen Media was attempting to use a strategy known as “tacking on” to establish THE BOLLYWOOD REPORTER as distinctive. To be able to “tack on” the use of a registered mark to a new mark in this way, the applicant must prove that the two marks are the same.
Whether or not two marks are legal equivalents is analyzed using tests established by two previous cases, re Dial-A-Matress Operating Corp. 57 USPQ2d at 1812; and Van Dyne-Crotty, Inc. v. Wear-GuardCorp., 926 F.2d 1156, 17 USPQ2d 1866, 1868 (Fed. Cir.1991). Based on this precedent, to be deemed legal equivalents the two marks “must be indistinguishable from one another or create the same, continuing commercial impression such that the consumer would consider both marks as the same mark.”
So, the question was asked, is THE BOLLYWOOD REPORTER indistinguishable from THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER? Nielsen Media argued that the marks were legal equivalents because they both refer to film industry news sources, and the only difference between them was an inconsequential one- the letter B and the letter H. The Court responded that this difference was very consequential because it entirely changed the meaning of the mark, from referring to the American film industry to the Indian film industry. Thus, the mark BOLLYWOOD REPORTER had not acquired distinctiveness based on Trademark Rule 2.41(B). The TTAB affirmed the decision to refuse registration, setting even more precedent for tacking cases and legal equivalent tests.
No related posts.
Comments
-
Recent Blog Articles
- Conference — Worldwide Patent Statistics for Forecasting Technology-Related Activities
- October 27 & 28 – Free Inventors Conference Presented by USPTO
- Native American Artists and Craftsman: GAO Discusses Violations and Lack of US Enforcement
- Trademark Monitoring Scam: Don’t get dooped
- Obama administration proposes stricter IP laws
- Are you getting sued? What getting a Cease and Desist letter means for you.
- What does ‘Use in Commerce’ mean in your USPTO trademark application?
- FCC issues new Net Neutrality rules
- USPTO Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program: Lay-A-Way Option Available to December 7, 2011
- The Battle over Network Neutrality May Finally Be Hitting Your Monthly Bill as Comcast and Netflix Provider Spar
- Facebook Continues its Litigation Trend – The Next Target: Lamebook
- Calculating Damages for Copyright Infringement
- Architectural Copyrights – When a building is more than the sum of its parts.
- Rosetta Stone Gears up for a Battle Against Google and the Future of Adwords
- New Rules Proposed on Gene Patenting
- 4chan and the Internet Dispense Justice as They See Fit
- A Thin Line Between Artistry and Architecture
- Speech Crimes: How talking on the Internet can get you into trouble
- Virginia Imagination Made Real EXPO for Innovators
- Trademark Abbreviations & The Public Use Doctrine
Subscribe:
Categories
- American Indian (4)
- Business (69)
- Charities (1)
- Copyright Articles (34)
- Architecture (1)
- Government Contracting (9)
- Internet (2)
- Inventor & Entrepreneur Updates (64)
- law (22)
- Online Privacy (11)
- Patent Articles (50)
- Press release (6)
- trademark (25)
- Trademark Articles (28)
- U Decide (1)
- Uncategorized (14)