Monthly Archives: March 2013

Public Association Trademarks: The Case of the New York Yankees and the Evil Empire

by Lizbeth Hasse

Every once in a while, a court issues a decision reminding us that we may have rights we’ve never known about or sought to assert. This time the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has given the New York Yankees more than they initially sought to claim for themselves.

Last month, a panel of TTAB judges held that the New York Yankees could prevent Evil Enterprises, Inc. from using the phrase BASEBALLS EVIL EMPIRE on clothing because the public had, in fact, come to regard the New York Yankees as, the “evil empire” of Major League Baseball.

California Attorney General Provides Mobile App Privacy Checklist: Guidance for App Developers, Distributors, Advertisers

by Lizbeth Hasse

As discussed in a previous Creative Industry Law blog post, California Attorney General Kamala Harris began a two-pronged enforcement strategy last year to bring mobile app developers, platform providers, and mobile ad networks in line with California’s Online Privacy and Protection Act (“COPPA”).

The AG sent notices of non-compliance to offending entities (a sample notice letter can be found here). In December, selected lawsuits were filed (e.g., Harris’ action against Delta). Recently, the Attorney General’s office released Privacy on the Go, a set of guidelines to help those involved in mobile app development, distribution platforms, and advertising to better understand how to meet California’s OPPA’s requirements.

Trademark Applications Web Specimens: the USPTO Releases New Guidelines

by Lizbeth Hasse

Because so many companies market their goods and services online, owners and management naturally expect that their branded websites will be good specimens to support their applications for trademark registration and extensions.

Websites are usually excellent and appropriate demonstrations of the use of a trademark. But, companies are well-advised to use extra care when submitting a website sample as a supporting specimen for trademark registration; the USPTO’s examination of them is especially exacting. If it finds the specimen insufficient, the consequence may be long delays in the application process and possible rejection of the mark.