![]() This case exemplifies the difficulty that companies are confronted with when there is a lack of clarity as to trademark and intellectual property. Intellectual property should be understood from all perspectives On the other side, companies that try to use terms that are recognizable in some way could face legal scrutiny without the generic argument to protect them. Because of this, many brands are trying shield themselves from similar circumstances. This does not alter the remaining confusion over generic terminology. The sides came to a confidential settlement. The court decided in Tiffany’s favor and a $21 million award was made. In response, Tiffany’s stated that the term was not generic and the labeling was unclear. Costco asserted that the term is based on the setting created by the Tiffany founder and it could use it. Costco replied that it was not referring to Tiffany, but the setting of the diamonds. Tiffany filed the case claiming that Costco’s use of the word “Tiffany” in its stores to point customers in the direction of rings was a violation of its trademark. It was recently settled, but there is still a debate over this. – were embroiled in an eight-year case that centered on terminology and how to define whether it is generic or not. Two large companies – Costco and Tiffany & Co. Trademark dispute between two prominent companies settled Having comprehensive advice can be vital to achieve a positive outcome. ![]() When dealing with intellectual property, trademark issues, copyrights and other considerations in this area of the law, it is important to understand how generic terms might factor in with how the case is resolved. Some have significant ambiguity that give credence to the claim of a violation on one end and a defense against the allegation of wrongdoing on the other. In New York, not every dispute over intellectual property will be easy to navigate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |