John Lennon Unibet General Motors Intellectual Property
John Lennon, Unibet, General Motors: Intellectual Property
By Victoria Slind-Flor
Feb. 13 (Bloomberg) — Yoko Ono, the widow of John Lennon,
is trying to stop a U.S. musician from using the former Beatle;s
last name.
Ono filed a complaint with the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office;s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board seeking cancellation
of Lennon Murphy;s trademark registration.
Murphy received registration for the mark “Lennon;; in
January 2003, according to the patent office database.
The registration covers goods and services that include
musical sound recordings, musical video recordings and an
archive of recorded performances stored on a global computer
network, according to the database.
Murphy recorded songs for Arista Records. Her debut album
“Damaged Goods;; was released on September 11, 2001.
Murphy is described as a “Nashville rocker;; on the
midwestbeat.com Web Site. She said on her personal page
published on the Web by MySpace Inc. that her music is “very
much me, my life, the riot grrl, angry against men, but a lot of
songs aren;t about relationships, they;re just interpreted that
way by listeners.;;
Mary K. Levin of New York;s Cowan Liebowitz %26amp; Latman
handled Murphy;s registration. She declined to comment
yesterday, saying she hadn;t represented Murphy recently.
Murphy posted information about Ono;s efforts on her
MySpace Web site Feb. 7. Within five days, she received 205
responses supporting her and disparaging Ono;s efforts.
She said she was given her first name at birth, and that
her mother named her for “John Lennon that wrote songs, painted
and baked bread with his son. She named me for the man, not the
pop star,;; she said. John Lennon was shot and killed in New
York on Dec. 8, 1980.
Murphy has until March 4 to answer Ono;s request for
cancellation of the trademark. She says she doesn;t have “the
$50,000 to hire a lawyer and fight this.;;
If people were “confusing me with John Lennon and
accidentally buying my records I should have more than enough
money to live my life and hire a lawyer,;; she said. “I haven;t
worked since October 2007, so I live on just enough to get
through the months until I get back on the road.;;
Ono said Murphy;s conduct is “designed to harness and
exploit the popularity of John Lennon,;; according to her
complaint.
“The distinctive artistic brilliance that has come to be
associated with the Lennon name, likeness, image and trademarks
is of inestimable value to his successor: it represents Lennon;s
inimitable genius and extraordinary talent,;; Ono said in her
request for cancellation filed Jan. 13.
Dorothy M. Weber of New York;s Shukat Arrow Hafer Weber %26amp;
Herbsman represents Ono.
The case is In the matter of Trademark Registration No.
2676604 for the mark “Lennon,;; ESTTA187448.
Primos Sues Hunter;s Specialties for False Advertising
Primos Inc., a company that makes hunters; gear, sued a
competitor for false advertising and product disparagement.
Primos, based in Flora, Mississippi, added a new product
line in 2007: Silver XP items intended to remove all human
scents from hunters, allowing them to get closer to their prey.
The products all contain colloidal silver, which is a suspension
of tiny silver particles in a liquid.
The company;s colloidal silver products include sprays,
wipes, laundry detergents, body soap and shampoo, bar soap,
deodorant, lip balm and breath strips, according to the
company;s Web site.
Hunter;s Specialties Inc., of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, also
makes products designed to eliminate human scent. That company;s
Scent-a-way product line doesn;t contain colloidal silver.
Instead, Scent-a-way products use baking soda as an active
ingredient, according to the complaint Primos filed Feb. 8 in
federal court in Las Vegas.
Both companies exhibited at Shot Show 2008 in Las Vegas
from Feb. 2 to Feb. 5. The exhibition is the “world;s largest
showcase of firearms, hunting and outdoor products,;; according
to the exhibition Web site.
Hunter;s Specialties “commenced a false advertising
campaign directed at Primos and its scent-elimination product
line;; at the show, according to the complaint. Hunter;s
Specialties “falsely claimed that its competitors; scent-
elimination products that used colloidal silver are unsafe,;;
Primos said in its court papers.
Hunters; based its campaign on a 1999 report from the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration relating to over-the-counter drug
products, according to the complaint. “Post-1999 scientific
studies show that using colloidal silver in drug products is
safe,;; Primos claims in its pleadings.
A man whose skin permanently turned blue from the ingestion
of colloidal silver appeared on NBC;s Today Show in January.
The baking soda used in Scent-a-Way is “at the very least,
no safer than Primos Silver XP products,;; Primos said in its
pleadings. Primos noted that reactions to baking soda can
include rashes, hives, difficulty breathing, tightness in chest,
swelling of the mouth, black tarry stools, headaches,
irritability, muscle spasms or twitching, muscle rigidity,
nausea, pain, redness or swelling at the sight of topical
application, vomiting and weakness.
Primos asked the court to order Hunter;s to quit making
false claims about the colloidal silver products, and that
company officials be barred from mentioning the FDA study as
support for their own product.
Primos wants a recall of all Scent-a-Way ads containing
“false and misleading;; claims and asked for corrective
advertisements “in direct and exact proportion;; to the “false
advertising;; in which the colloidal silver products are
disparaged, according to the complaint.
The company also seeks money damages and attorney fees.
Hunter;s and Primos have sparred over IP issues in the
past. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2006
affirmed a lower court;s ruling that Primos; patents for a game
call were infringed by Hunter;s.
That case was Primos Inc. v. Hunter;s Specialties Inc.,
1:01-cv-00004-JAJ, U.S. District Court, Northern District of
Iowa (Cedar Rapids).
Manita Rawat of Denver;s Holland %26amp; Hart represents Primos
in the new dispute with Hunter;s.
The current case is Primos Inc. v. Hunter;s Specialties
Inc., 2:08-cv-00170-JCM-PAL, U.S. District Court, District of
Nevada (Las Vegas).
Unibet, William Hill Infringed Juventus;s Name, Court Says
Bookmakers Unibet Group of Malta and London-based William
Hill were found by a French court to have infringed the name of
Italian soccer club Juventus, according to a report posted on
the gamblingcompliance.com Web site Feb. 12.
The two bookmakers exploited Juventus; name for commercial
purposes, while promoting bets on the 2005 Champions League
match, according to GamblingCompliance.com. Juventus played Real
Madrid in that contest.
This ruling is the reverse of an earlier ruling from a
court in Belgium, according to GamblingCompliance.com.
The French court;s ruling is expected to be appealed,
GamblingCompliance.com reported.
Petter Nylander, Unibet;s chief executive officer, is under
investigation by the French government in a case relating to
illegal lotteries and horse-racing betting establishments.
Macedonia Seeks Trademark Registration for National Dish
Macedonia;s government is seeking trademark registration
for its version of ajvar, BalkanTravellers.com Web Site reported
Feb. 12.
Ajvar is an eggplant-based relish made with red peppers,
garlic, and chili pepper. Macedonia is seeking registration for
the term “Macedonian Ajvar,;; according to
BalkanTravellers.com.
“Branding would allow production to be standardized with
the ingredients and its preparation listed on the labels. This,
in turn, will guarantee quality and competitiveness at home and
on the world markets,;; said government spokesman Ivica
Bocevski, according to BalkanTravellers.com.
An early effort for trademark registration by a Serbian
company failed, with ajvar considered a generic term by
registration authorities, BalkanTravellers.com reported.
For other trademark news from yesterday click here.
Copyright
Gillan Graphics Sued for Infringing Poet;s Copyright
Gillan Graphics and Awards Inc. has been sued for copyright
infringement by a customer who said the company took a poem she
wrote honoring her mother, printed and framed it and sold it to
the public.
Felicia Gayden, of East St. Louis, Illinois, said she wrote
a poem “Dearest Mother,;; for her mom, and took it in to
Gillian for framing, according to her complaint.
She later discovered that Gillan, of Cahokia, Illinois,
“was using variations of this poem, merely changing the name of
the dedicated person, for public sale,;; according to court
papers.
Gayden, who registered the copyright on her poem in April
2006, sued Gillan for copyright infringement in federal court in
East St. Louis on Feb. 12.
She asked the court to order Gillan to quit using her poem
and for other damages.
She;s represented by Paul M. Storment III of Belleville,
Illinois.
The case is Gayden v. Gillan Graphics and Awards Inc.,
3:08-cv-JPG-DGW, U.S. District Court, Southern District of
Illinois (East St. Louis).
For other copyright news from yesterday click here.
Patents
General Motors, Five Others Sued for Patent Infringement
General Motors Corp. and five other auto manufacturers were
sued for infringing four patents covering technology controlling
the deployment of a car;s air bag.
Automotive Technologies International Inc., of Denver,
North Carolina, sued General Motors Corp., Nissan Motor Co.;s
Nissan North America, Ford Motor Co., Hyundai Motor Co.;s
Hyundai Motor America, DaimlerChrysler AG;s Mercedes-Benz USA,
and Fuji Heavy Industries; Fuji Heavy Industries USA in federal
court in Marshall, Texas, Feb. 11. Automotive Technolgies
conducts research into car safety, according to the company Web
site.
The automakers are accused of infringing patents 7,243,945,
6,869,100, and 6,850,824, which cover methods and apparatus for
controlling air bags. Additionally, General Motors is accused of
inducing others to infringe patent 6,833,516, for an “apparatus
and method for controlling a vehicular component,;; according to
the complaint. Brian Roffe of New York;s Frishauf, Holtz,
Goodman %26amp; Chick handled the applications for all the patents at
issue in this case.
Passengers can be injured or even killed by incorrect air
bag deployment, according to a 1982 paper from the Society of
Automotive Engineers. Ford, Honda and Nissan have all been sued
for damages relating to air bag deployment, according to
Bloomberg data.
Automotive Technologies is the plaintiff in several other
open patent-infringement cases relating to air bags:
The company sued Honda Motor Co.;s American Honda Motor
Co., General Motors and the Honda/NEC Solutions America;s joint
venture, Elesys North American Inc., in federal court in
Delaware in March 2006.
That case is Automotive Technologies International Inc. v
American Honda Motor Co., 1:06-00187-GMS, U.S. District Court,
District of Delaware (Wilmington).
Automotive Technologies sued Hyundai Motor America, BMW of
North America and Kia Motors America in Wilmington in June 2006.
That case is Automotive Technologies International Inc. V.
Hyundai Motor America, 1:06-cv-00391-GMS, U.S. District Court,
District of Delaware (Wilmington).
The company sued Siemens VDO Automotive Corp., TK
Electronics Inc., Calsonic Kansei Corp. and TRW Automotive
Holdings Corp. in federal court in Michigan in December 2006.
That case is Automotive Technologies International Inc. v.
Siemens VDO Automotive Corp., 2:06-cv-15756-RHC-DAS, U.S.
District Court, Eastern District of Michigan.
American Technologies is represented in the new case by
Edward W. Goldstein of Houston;s Goldstein Faucett %26amp; Prebeg.
The new case is Automotive Technologies International Inc.,
v. General Motors Corp., 2:08-cv-00057-TJW-CE, U.S. District
Court, Eastern District of Texas (Marshall).
For other patent news from yesterday click here.
For Bloomberg articles by lawyers on intellectual property
topics click here.
For daily Bloomberg legal analysis click here.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Victoria Slind-Flor in Oakland, California, at
