Firm Profile Practice Areas Industries Attorneys News & Events Publications Resources Contact Us
 
 
Gottlieb, Rackman & Resiman logo Intellectual Property News
In This Issue
GRR News
ARTICLE HEADLINE
Join Our List
Join Our Mailing List

                                                         October 2010



GRR Intellectual Property News is a newsletter issued by Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, P.C., an IP boutique.

The purpose of this newsletter is to keep in touch with our friends and colleagues as well as provide practical information and news relating to Intellectual Property law.

Please forward this newsletter to anyone who might be interested.

Previous issues of GRR Intellectual Property News can be found on our
website.
GRR NEWS
GRR Attends New York Fashion Week

On September 16, 2010 GRR attended the Argentine Designers Fashion Show as part of the Mercedes Benz Fashion Week. Six distinguished Argentine designers were showcased: Evangelina Bomparola, La Dolfina, Laura Valenzuela, Marcelo Senra, Maria Pryor and Ramirez.

 

                                                 Argentine Fashion Show 

                                                        Photo courtesy Karina Muller 

 

GRR also sponsored various activities held at the Argentine Consulate as well as a conference given, in Spanish, on September 17th by Diana Muller on "The Art of Protecting Intellectual Property in the Field of Fashion ". This conference, which included a thorough analysis of protection and enforcement actions in regard to trademarks, trade dress, copyrights, trade secrets, utility and design patents, was attended by the Argentine designers, business people and members of the Consulate of Argentina in New York City. It was taped by Lawline (www.lawline.com) and will soon be available on the internet.

 

Using intellectual property to protect fashion designs in the United States and abroad is an area in which GRR has substantial expertise.  

Attorney Presentations & Publications
Amy B. Goldsmith will be giving a presentation on Fraud and Identity Theft on October 19, 2010.  Click here for more information.

Diana Muller was interviewed for an article about counterfeiting in Lating America, which appeared in the October 15, 2010 issue of Inter-American Dialogue's Latin America Advisor.

George Gottlieb and Marc P. Misthal were interviewed for an article appearing in the September 2010 issue of Metropolis Magazine about the legal means by which designs can be protected. 

George Gottlieb and Marc P. Misthal, along with Prof. Guillermo Jimenez and Barbara Kolsun, co-authored and article entitled "Fashion Law: Key Issues in a New Legal Discipline," which appeared in the Fall 2010 issue of Bright Ideas, a publication of the Intellectual Property Law Section of the New York State Bar Association.

Amy B. Goldsmith gave a presentation on the protection of product designs to Japanese attorneys and their clients at the offices of the Soei Patent and Law firm in Tokyo, Japan.

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE
Goats on the Roof

A  Wisconsin restaurant's signature offering cannot be found on the menu, cannot be found on any signage, and is not even made in its kitchen - its signature is the goats grazing on its grass-covered roof. And any other restaurant or other related business venture that is thinking of putting goats on its roof will run the risk of being brought into federal court for trademark/trade dress infringement.

The restaurant, owned by proprietor/manager Lars Johnson, claims trademark rights in placing goats on a roof in order to attract customers to go to the restaurant. According to Johnson, "the restaurant is one of the top-grossing in Wisconsin, and I'm sure the goats have helped." Goats have apparently been placed on the roof of the restaurant since 1974.

 

So when a tourist spot over 750 miles away -- Tiger Mountain Market in Rabun County, Georgia -- decided to have goats graze on its rooftop, Johnson brought a federal lawsuit for infringement and unfair competition. The lawsuit declared: "Notwithstanding...[the] prior, continuous and extensive use of the Goats on the Roof Trade Dress, defendant Tiger Mountain Market opened a grocery store and gift shop in buildings with grass on the roofs and allows goats to climb on the roofs of its buildings."

 

Danny Benson, the owner of the accused infringing establishment, decided not to fight the lawsuit, in large part because of the expense involved.  According to the Wall Street Journal, "he considered replacing his goats with pigs before deciding their heft and tendency to 'root around' would pose a danger to people below." While obviously a difficult decision, this author agrees with Danny's prudent behavior.


For more information contact Jeffrey M. Kaden.
IP LAW IN PRACTICE
What Happens When You Remove the "B" From BLT Burger?

Remove the "B" from the name of the well-known BLT Burger restaurant and you have a new restaurant in Sag Harbor, New York called "LT Burger."  It turns out that names are not the only similarities between these two restaurants.  According to the complaint filed by BLT Restaurant Group LLC, LT Burger's menu is a near copy of BLT Burger's menu.  Below is a comparison of some the menu items:

 

BLT Burger Menu

LT Burger Menu

Burgers

Classic

Classic Hamburger

American Kobe (Snake River Farm American Wagyu Beef)

Snake River Farm American Kobe

The Stripper (hamburger topped with lettuce, tomato, onion, bell pepper and avocado, but no bun)

Skinny Dip Burger (topped with bell pepper, avocado, and lettuce, but no bun)

Milkshakes

Twinkie Boy

Twinkie

The Lunch Box (vanilla, peanut butter, grape jelly)

PB&J (vanilla, peanut butter, grape jelly)

Black & White Swirl

Black & White Swirl

Berry Me (strawberry ice cream and mixed fresh berries)

Berry Good (strawberry ice cream and mixed fresh berries)

Nut Job (hazelnut ice cream, Nutella, and slivered almonds)

Crazy Nut (hazelnut ice cream, Nutella, and almonds)

 

Additionally, the proprietor of LT Burger, Laurent Tourondel, is a former member of BLT Restaurant Group LLC and had signed BLT Restaurant Group LLC's operating agreement.

 

 While menus are often a very important aspect of a restaurant's identity, they can be one of the most difficult intellectual properties to protect.  While the similarity of the two restaurants appears obvious from the complaint, the legal claims are not so simple.  This case may very well be decided not by trademarks and copyrights, but by the terms of the BLT Restaurant Group's operating agreement.

We will follow this case and keep you updated on any developments.

 

For more information, contact Joshua Matthews.

Inventors Enthusiastic About 3-D Printing

Inventors throughout the world are using 3-D printing to quickly and inexpensively create prototypes and often to launch into low volume manufacturing.  Inventors have long been hampered by the slow moving and the often expensive process of making prototypes, altering them to come to a final design, having molds produced, and manufacturing products from that mold.   The advent of 3-D printers, which create objects by literally placing one layer of plastic or metal on another, can now quickly create prototypes and make variations if needed.  These 3-D printers were originally very expensive, and used only by large scale manufactures to build prototypes. 

 

Now, at a cost of approximately $10,000 or even less, these printers can be used by the individual inventor, first to make prototypes and then for low volume, custom made production.  Door knobs, perfume bottles, furniture and architectural models have been reported as being made by these 3-D printers.  Entire new businesses have formed around this model.

 

Shapeways, an innovative upstart, with origins in Holland, has recently jumped on this technology bandwagon, and plans to open 3-D printing shops in the United States, where architects, designers and even the general public, can come in and order prototypes or even finished products.  This company has already raised $5 million for this venture. 

 

As this technology becomes more widespread, it will be necessary to consider its relationship to issues such as infringement and counterfeiting, as well as any unanticipated issues it may raise. 

 

For more information, contact George Gottlieb.

IP DEVELOPMENTS
Downloading File is Not a Public Performance

In the matter of Applications of RealNetworks, Inc. and Yahoo! Inc., 09-0539 (2d Cir. Sept. 28, 2010).

 

RealNetworks and Yahoo! sought a blanket license permitting them to perform all music in the ASCAP repertory on their websites, on demand to their users, in radio-style webcasts, in audio-visual movie and television clips and in other manners.  Additionally, RealNetworks and Yahoo! offer musical works to their users as downloads.  Pursuant to a consent decree that governs how ASCAP may participate in the music industry, the district court had authority to determine the appropriate license fee payable to ASCAP.  RealNetworks and Yahoo! invoked the court's authority, and the court determined that the download of a digital file does not constitute a public performance of that work which would require a license.  ASCAP appealed the decision, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.  ASCAP argued that downloads fall within the Copyright Act's definition of a public performance because the downloads transmit or otherwise communicate a performance.  The Court of Appeals disagreed, explaining that the Copyright Act requires the transmission to be of the performance itself (such as through broadcasting), and not the transmission of a file containing the performance.  The court further explained that the Copyright Act defines a performance as the playing, recitation or rendering of a work, all of which refer to actions that can perceived contemporaneously.  Since the transferring of electronic files from an online server to a local hard drive does not involve playing, recitation or rendering, the court found that it does not constitute a performance.   


For further information, contact Marc P. Misthal.
Online Privacy:  A Non Sequitur?
In this brave new virtual world, almost everyone supplies personal information to social and business media, such as Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn and other web-based services. Although one can designate certain information as public to everyone and other information as private and only available to certain users, in recent personal injury litigation, the party possessing the "private" information has been ordered to allow the other party complete access.

 

In Kathleen Romano vs. Steelcase, Inc., 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 20388 (Sept. 21, 2010, NYS Suffolk) Ms. Romano alleged that she had fallen off an allegedly defective Steelcase desk chair while working at Stony Brook University, and that her resulting injuries were permanent and debilitating and even necessitated surgery. She further noted in her complaint that she was confined to her house. Yet Steelcase noted that Ms. Romano's public Facebook and MySpace pages revealed that she had an active lifestyle which included traveling, and accordingly Steelcase requested her to consent to access to the social networking sites' private pages. Ms. Romano refused to provide the information or a consent, and Steelcase asked the court to compel Ms. Romano to disclose the information or consent to its disclosure. Ms. Romano argued that she "possesse[d] a reasonable expectation of privacy in her home computer." Facebook opposed the motion as well, stating that Ms. Romano should provide the information directly because such provision by Facebook would violate the Stored Communications Act (SCA), which, according to Facebook, bars production of a non-consenting subscriber's information even when pursuant to court order or subpoena.

 

 Judge Arlen Spinner of the New York Supreme Court, Suffolk County, ordered the disclosure, holding that denying Steelcase access to the information "not only would go against the liberal discovery policies of New York favoring pretrial disclosure, but would condone Plaintiff's attempt to hide relevant information behind self-regulated privacy settings." The court ordered Ms. Romano to provide Steelcase's attorneys with "a properly executed consent and authorization as may be required by the operators of Facebook and MySpace, permitting said Defendant to gain access to Plaintiff's Facebook and MySpace records, including any records previously deleted or archived by said operators ."

 

The Court Order isn't limited in any way to records regarding only the personal injury issue, and the Judge did not specifically discuss the provisions of the SCA.  No appeals have been filed to date, but the case illustrates that "Be Careful" should be everyone's philosophy when supplying information...and that any plaintiff or defendant in a litigation must evaluate its allegations and defenses in light of the potential availability of "private" web postings in discovery.

For further information, contact Amy B. Goldsmith.
Intellectual Property News Editorial Board: Richard S. Schurin (rschurin@grr.com), Marc P. Misthal (mmisthal@grr.com), and Steven Stern (sstern@grr.com) of Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, P.C.

Suggestions, questions and comments should be directed to the Editorial Board by email or telephone (212) 684-3900.

For forty years, Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, P.C. has provided legal advice and guidance on all aspects of patent, trademark, copyright, and unfair competition law, tailoring its counsel to the specific needs of its clients. 

This newsletter may contain promotional material and/or attorney advertising.  If you would like to be removed from the distribution list, please click on the SafeUnsubscribe link below.

Gottlieb, Rackman & Resiman logo      40th Anniversary      View our profile on LinkedIn
Safe Unsubscribe
This email was sent by ipnews@grr.com.
 
Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, P.C. | 270 Madison Avenue | New York | NY | 10016