#tradedress — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #tradedress, aggregated by home.social.
-
Would you say these candy designs are "virtually identical"?
That's what the plaintiff argues in its opposition to the defendant's motion to dismiss in Just Born, Inc. v. Maillo Confections, No. 2:26-Cv-04606 (D.N.J.)).
The parties also disagree on functionality & distinctiveness.
#TradeDress -
Over the past few years, high-end brands have waged a war against “Dupe Culture.” That battle has repeatedly spilled over into the courtroom.
https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2026/06/11/the-legal-fight-against-dupe-culture/
-
Over the past few years, high-end brands have waged a war against “Dupe Culture.” That battle has repeatedly spilled over into the courtroom.
https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2026/06/11/the-legal-fight-against-dupe-culture/
-
Over the past few years, high-end brands have waged a war against “Dupe Culture.” That battle has repeatedly spilled over into the courtroom.
https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2026/06/11/the-legal-fight-against-dupe-culture/
-
Over the past few years, high-end brands have waged a war against “Dupe Culture.” That battle has repeatedly spilled over into the courtroom.
https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2026/06/11/the-legal-fight-against-dupe-culture/
-
Appeals Court Focuses on Fees in Garden Hose Color Mark Argument https://www.allforgardening.com/1809675/appeals-court-focuses-on-fees-in-garden-hose-color-mark-argument/ #AttorneyFeeAwards #garden #SecondaryMeaning #TradeDress #TrademarkCancellation #TrademarkInfringement #TrademarkRegistration #witnesses
-
Appeals Court Focuses on Fees in Garden Hose Color Mark Argument https://www.allforgardening.com/1809675/appeals-court-focuses-on-fees-in-garden-hose-color-mark-argument/ #AttorneyFeeAwards #garden #SecondaryMeaning #TradeDress #TrademarkCancellation #TrademarkInfringement #TrademarkRegistration #witnesses
-
" U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ... ruled that ... each element of counterclaimant Sol de Janeiro's brand of Brazilian Bum Bum Cream jar individually and altogether serves as a function that improves the container's quality." www.law360.com/ip/articles/... #TradeDress
-
Analyzing the Lululemon v. Costco Dupe Suit
Guest blog post by Profs. Sarah Fackrell & Alexandra J. Roberts https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2025/07/analyzing-the-lululemon-v-costco-dupe-suit-guest-blog-post.htm #trademark #design #tradedress -
Analyzing the Lululemon v. Costco Dupe Suit
Guest blog post by Profs. Sarah Fackrell & Alexandra J. Roberts https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2025/07/analyzing-the-lululemon-v-costco-dupe-suit-guest-blog-post.htm #trademark #design #tradedress -
Analyzing the Lululemon v. Costco Dupe Suit
Guest blog post by Profs. Sarah Fackrell & Alexandra J. Roberts https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2025/07/analyzing-the-lululemon-v-costco-dupe-suit-guest-blog-post.htm #trademark #design #tradedress -
Analyzing the Lululemon v. Costco Dupe Suit
Guest blog post by Profs. Sarah Fackrell & Alexandra J. Roberts https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2025/07/analyzing-the-lululemon-v-costco-dupe-suit-guest-blog-post.htm #trademark #design #tradedress -
George McCain, #Fluke's industrial designer, on the colour of the company's #multimeters
-
George McCain, #Fluke's industrial designer, on the colour of the company's #multimeters
-
George McCain, #Fluke's industrial designer, on the colour of the company's #multimeters
-
George McCain, #Fluke's industrial designer, on the colour of the company's #multimeters
-
Fourth Circuit affirms the USPTO's refusal to register the certain parts of the Timberland boot design as trade dress:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358.60.0.pdf
The court agreed that the claimed design was not distinctive and did not reach the issue of functionality.
-
Fourth Circuit affirms the USPTO's refusal to register the certain parts of the Timberland boot design as trade dress:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358.60.0.pdf
The court agreed that the claimed design was not distinctive and did not reach the issue of functionality.
-
Fourth Circuit affirms the USPTO's refusal to register the certain parts of the Timberland boot design as trade dress:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358.60.0.pdf
The court agreed that the claimed design was not distinctive and did not reach the issue of functionality.
-
Fourth Circuit affirms the USPTO's refusal to register the certain parts of the Timberland boot design as trade dress:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358/gov.uscourts.ca4.170358.60.0.pdf
The court agreed that the claimed design was not distinctive and did not reach the issue of functionality.
-
Federal Circuit reverses the grant of a preliminary injunction (based on utility patent and trade dress infringement) in a dispute between indoor "adventure parks":
http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/22-2047.OPINION.2-16-2024_2271523.pdf
-
Federal Circuit reverses the grant of a preliminary injunction (based on utility patent and trade dress infringement) in a dispute between indoor "adventure parks":
http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/22-2047.OPINION.2-16-2024_2271523.pdf
-
Federal Circuit reverses the grant of a preliminary injunction (based on utility patent and trade dress infringement) in a dispute between indoor "adventure parks":
http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/22-2047.OPINION.2-16-2024_2271523.pdf
-
Federal Circuit reverses the grant of a preliminary injunction (based on utility patent and trade dress infringement) in a dispute between indoor "adventure parks":
http://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/22-2047.OPINION.2-16-2024_2271523.pdf
-
Ledge Lounger v. Luxury Lounger - Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction against trade dress infringement. Defendant agreed to the entry of such an injunction, without conceding liability. Defendant redesigned the accused product. Plaintiff asked the court to hold the defendant in contempt, arguing that the new product violated the injunction.
Decision: No contempt because "there has been neither an adjudication nor an admission of infringement."
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429.59.0.pdf
-
Ledge Lounger v. Luxury Lounger - Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction against trade dress infringement. Defendant agreed to the entry of such an injunction, without conceding liability. Defendant redesigned the accused product. Plaintiff asked the court to hold the defendant in contempt, arguing that the new product violated the injunction.
Decision: No contempt because "there has been neither an adjudication nor an admission of infringement."
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429.59.0.pdf
-
Ledge Lounger v. Luxury Lounger - Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction against trade dress infringement. Defendant agreed to the entry of such an injunction, without conceding liability. Defendant redesigned the accused product. Plaintiff asked the court to hold the defendant in contempt, arguing that the new product violated the injunction.
Decision: No contempt because "there has been neither an adjudication nor an admission of infringement."
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429.59.0.pdf
-
Ledge Lounger v. Luxury Lounger - Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction against trade dress infringement. Defendant agreed to the entry of such an injunction, without conceding liability. Defendant redesigned the accused product. Plaintiff asked the court to hold the defendant in contempt, arguing that the new product violated the injunction.
Decision: No contempt because "there has been neither an adjudication nor an admission of infringement."
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429/gov.uscourts.txsd.1907429.59.0.pdf
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
In a trade dress case, Polaroid argues that Fujifilm is estopped from arguing that its trade dress is functional because Fujifilm got a design patent on a nearly identical design:
https://www.scribd.com/document/704650539/Fujifilm-v-Polaroid-MSJ-Opp-n
Two things:
1) No, design patents are NOT evidence of trade dress functionality: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2710661
2) How did Fujifilm get this patent?
-
What about the trade dress claim?
Emson alleges that it has unregistered trade dress rights in "the colors black and red applied in combination to the surface of the device’s handle. In particular, the color black is applied to the surface of the handle body and the color red is applied to a generally ogive-shaped area along the top surface of the handle (the “Car Cane Trade Dress”)."
-
What about the trade dress claim?
Emson alleges that it has unregistered trade dress rights in "the colors black and red applied in combination to the surface of the device’s handle. In particular, the color black is applied to the surface of the handle body and the color red is applied to a generally ogive-shaped area along the top surface of the handle (the “Car Cane Trade Dress”)."
-
What about the trade dress claim?
Emson alleges that it has unregistered trade dress rights in "the colors black and red applied in combination to the surface of the device’s handle. In particular, the color black is applied to the surface of the handle body and the color red is applied to a generally ogive-shaped area along the top surface of the handle (the “Car Cane Trade Dress”)."
-
What about the trade dress claim?
Emson alleges that it has unregistered trade dress rights in "the colors black and red applied in combination to the surface of the device’s handle. In particular, the color black is applied to the surface of the handle body and the color red is applied to a generally ogive-shaped area along the top surface of the handle (the “Car Cane Trade Dress”)."
-
SCOTUS has denied cert in #TrendilyVersusJSC. #TradeDress
Side note: These new #SCOTUS tracking emails are pretty great. Just click the envelope icon on the top left corner of a docket to sign up.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/23-194.html
-
SCOTUS has denied cert in #TrendilyVersusJSC. #TradeDress
Side note: These new #SCOTUS tracking emails are pretty great. Just click the envelope icon on the top left corner of a docket to sign up.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/23-194.html
-
SCOTUS has denied cert in #TrendilyVersusJSC. #TradeDress
Side note: These new #SCOTUS tracking emails are pretty great. Just click the envelope icon on the top left corner of a docket to sign up.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/23-194.html
-
SCOTUS has denied cert in #TrendilyVersusJSC. #TradeDress
Side note: These new #SCOTUS tracking emails are pretty great. Just click the envelope icon on the top left corner of a docket to sign up.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/23-194.html
-
Rachel Adin LLC sues H&M over jewelry, neither side seems to have any idea how design patents work: https://www.scribd.com/document/695487112/Adin-v-H-M-Complaint
-
Rachel Adin LLC sues H&M over jewelry, neither side seems to have any idea how design patents work: https://www.scribd.com/document/695487112/Adin-v-H-M-Complaint
-
Rachel Adin LLC sues H&M over jewelry, neither side seems to have any idea how design patents work: https://www.scribd.com/document/695487112/Adin-v-H-M-Complaint
-
Rachel Adin LLC sues H&M over jewelry, neither side seems to have any idea how design patents work: https://www.scribd.com/document/695487112/Adin-v-H-M-Complaint
-
Interesting post from @patentlyo about a new cert petition about the role of copying in determining whether a design has acquired secondary meaning:
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2023/12/39390.html
Apparently, in the underlying case, the Ninth Circuit stated that "there is no logical reason for...precise copying save an attempt to realize upon a secondary meaning that is in existence."
That is....just ridiculous.
-
Interesting post from @patentlyo about a new cert petition about the role of copying in determining whether a design has acquired secondary meaning:
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2023/12/39390.html
Apparently, in the underlying case, the Ninth Circuit stated that "there is no logical reason for...precise copying save an attempt to realize upon a secondary meaning that is in existence."
That is....just ridiculous.
-
Interesting post from @patentlyo about a new cert petition about the role of copying in determining whether a design has acquired secondary meaning:
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2023/12/39390.html
Apparently, in the underlying case, the Ninth Circuit stated that "there is no logical reason for...precise copying save an attempt to realize upon a secondary meaning that is in existence."
That is....just ridiculous.
-
Interesting post from @patentlyo about a new cert petition about the role of copying in determining whether a design has acquired secondary meaning:
https://patentlyo.com/patent/2023/12/39390.html
Apparently, in the underlying case, the Ninth Circuit stated that "there is no logical reason for...precise copying save an attempt to realize upon a secondary meaning that is in existence."
That is....just ridiculous.
-
TOB has filed a motion for a TRO in its new utility patent & trade dress #ScheduleA case:
https://www.scribd.com/document/687704257/TOB-23-cv-01563-Motion-for-TRO
-
TOB has filed a motion for a TRO in its new utility patent & trade dress #ScheduleA case:
https://www.scribd.com/document/687704257/TOB-23-cv-01563-Motion-for-TRO
-
TOB has filed a motion for a TRO in its new utility patent & trade dress #ScheduleA case:
https://www.scribd.com/document/687704257/TOB-23-cv-01563-Motion-for-TRO
-
TOB has filed a motion for a TRO in its new utility patent & trade dress #ScheduleA case:
https://www.scribd.com/document/687704257/TOB-23-cv-01563-Motion-for-TRO
-
Thousand Oaks Barrel (aka TOB) files new #ScheduleA case, with new counsel, in EDVA:
https://www.scribd.com/document/685193422/Thousand-Oaks-Barrel-v-Schedule-A-EDVA-Complaint
(h/t @sqfreak)
This time, they assert utility patent & (unregistered) trade dress infringement.
Unlike in the NDIL case, Thousand Oaks Barrel does not hide its own name OR the patent numbers.
-
Thousand Oaks Barrel (aka TOB) files new #ScheduleA case, with new counsel, in EDVA:
https://www.scribd.com/document/685193422/Thousand-Oaks-Barrel-v-Schedule-A-EDVA-Complaint
(h/t @sqfreak)
This time, they assert utility patent & (unregistered) trade dress infringement.
Unlike in the NDIL case, Thousand Oaks Barrel does not hide its own name OR the patent numbers.
-
Thousand Oaks Barrel (aka TOB) files new #ScheduleA case, with new counsel, in EDVA:
https://www.scribd.com/document/685193422/Thousand-Oaks-Barrel-v-Schedule-A-EDVA-Complaint
(h/t @sqfreak)
This time, they assert utility patent & (unregistered) trade dress infringement.
Unlike in the NDIL case, Thousand Oaks Barrel does not hide its own name OR the patent numbers.
-
Thousand Oaks Barrel (aka TOB) files new #ScheduleA case, with new counsel, in EDVA:
https://www.scribd.com/document/685193422/Thousand-Oaks-Barrel-v-Schedule-A-EDVA-Complaint
(h/t @sqfreak)
This time, they assert utility patent & (unregistered) trade dress infringement.
Unlike in the NDIL case, Thousand Oaks Barrel does not hide its own name OR the patent numbers.
-
And, in a move that should surprise no one, Wonderful is appealing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589.43.0.pdf
-
And, in a move that should surprise no one, Wonderful is appealing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589.43.0.pdf
-
And, in a move that should surprise no one, Wonderful is appealing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589.43.0.pdf
-
And, in a move that should surprise no one, Wonderful is appealing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589/gov.uscourts.nysd.559589.43.0.pdf