City of Portland Defends its Historic Sign in Federal Court

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The City of Portland bought the famous Portland Oregon sign – commonly known as the “White Stag” sign or the “Made in Oregon” sign – Portland's state trademark registration in the signin 2010. The following year, in July 2011, the city registered its trademark with the state of Oregon. It appears that the City started charging license fees for commercial use of images of the famous sign around January 2013. Vintage Roadside is an Oregon company that aims “to bring back to light the authentic advertising graphics and logos of [] bygone businesses” by giving “people the opportunity to indulge in one of life’s great pleasures: the gift shop souvenir!” Vintage Roadside also runs an Etsy store that sells photographs of vintage roadside attractions.

According to the Complaint, the City of Portland’s attorneys contacted Vintage Roadside and asserted that their photograph violated the City’s trademark in the sign. Vintage Roadside filed a preemptive lawsuit, seeking a declaratory judgment, in the Multnomah County Circuit. Plaintiff alleges both that the City’s state trademark is unenforceable and that Plaintiff is not infringing and has not infringed any enforceable trademark relating to the sign. The City has removed the case to federal court. The heart of Plaintiff’s argument is that the City of Portland incorrectly filed its Vintage Roadside Etsy Screenshottrademark application. The recitation of services in the state trademark registration (as shown above, and on p. 9 of the Complaint below) is awkward. The only good or service listed on the application is, “The sign is a visual icon associated with Portland, and is seen all over the world when major events come to Portland.” In the space available to explain the mode or manner in which the mark is used, the City of Portland simply wrote, “An historical landmark of Portland, Oregon.” Vintage Roadside is alleging that the City of Portland was not using the mark in connection with the sale of goods and services and falsely certified that the mark was in use.

More updates to come as the case progresses…

Vintage Roadside LLC v. City of Portland

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01346
File Date: Monday, July 20, 2015
Plaintiff: Vintage Roadside LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Robert A. Swider of Swider Haver LLP
Defendant: City of Portland
Defendant Counsel: J. Scott Moede and Simon Whang of Portland City Attorney’s Office; Shawn J. Kolitch of Kolisch Hartwell, PC
Cause: Unenforceability of Trademark, Non-Infringement of Trademark
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Judge Marco A. Hernandez

Oregon Litigation Update – adidas America v. Reliable Knitting Works

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Adidas has filed a trademark complaint against Reliable Knitting Works, a Wisconsin based company doing business as Reliable of Milwaukee. Adidas is alleging that Muk Luks, one of Reliable’s brands, sells a shoe that, Adidas alleges, “bears parallel stripes on the mid-foot portion of the upper in a manner likely to be confused with adidas’s famous Three-Stripe Mark.”

Adidas is asking the Court to: “(a) permanently enjoin Reliable from marketing or selling footwear bearing confusingly similar two-, three-, and four-stripe imitations of the Three-Stripe Mark; (b) award adidas monetary damages and to treble that award; (c) require Reliable to disgorge all profits from sales of the Infringing Footwear; and (d) award adidas punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.” 

adidas America, Inc. et al v. Reliable Knitting Works, Inc.

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-01217-PK
File Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America, Inc.adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Kristina J. Holm and Stephen M. Feldman of Perkins Coie, LLP
Defendant: Reliable Knitting Works, Inc.
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Paul Papak

5 More Cobbler Download Cases

Tags

, , , , ,

Carl Crowell has filed 5 more BitTorrent cases for Voltage Pictures‘ film, The Cobbler.

Cobbler Nevada LLC v. Doe

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00825-ST, -00826-ST, -00827-ST, -00828-ST, -00829-ST,
File Date: Thursday, May 14, 2015
Plaintiff: Cobbler Nevada LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell, Drew P. Taylor of Crowell Law
Defendant: Doe
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Indirect Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart

Sample Complaint:

Another Set of Voltage Pictures Download Cases

Tags

,

Having already filed numerous copyright infringement claims on behalf of Voltage Pictures for the films Dallas Buyers Club and Charlie Countryman, now they’re going after downloads of The Cobbler, starring Adam Sandler and Method Man.

 Cobbler Nevada LLC v. Doe

Court Case Numbers: 3:15-cv-00774-ST, -00776-ST, -00778-ST, -00779-ST
File Date: Wednesday, May 06, 2015
Plaintiff: Cobbler Nevada LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell, Drew P. Taylor of Crowell Law
Defendant: Doe
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Indirect Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart

Sample Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Trailers International LLC v. Xiaofei Yang

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Vince Webb and his company, Trailers International (formerly UtilityMate), previously filed suit against Zhuhai Sharp-Group Enterprise Co. Ltd. (aka Jumbo Tools & Equipment), a Chinese trading company, for manufacturing counterfeits of its UtilityMate® and UtilitySport® trailers. Jumbo was, at one time, authorized to manufacture trailers for Webb’s company but now it is alleged that Jumbo is making and distributing counterfeits, primarily through Altocraft USA, Inc. Now, Webb is filing suit against XiaoFei Yang, president and CEO of Jumbo.

Trailers International LLC et al v. XiaoFei Yang

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00767-SI
File Date: Monday, May 04, 2015
PlaintiffTrailers International LLCVincent L. Webb
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen J. Joncus and Xavier A. Clark of Klarquist Sparkman LLP
Defendant:XiaoFei Yang
Cause: Copyright Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Trademark Counterfeiting, False Designation of Origin, Unfair Competition (Passing Off), Unfair Business Practices, Conversion, Trade Secret Misappropriation
CourtDistrict of Oregon
Judge: Judge Michael H. Simon

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – Control Solutions v. Microdaq.com

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Control Solutions is in the business of selling certified, calibrated thermometers and data “loggers,” devices that record temperature readings over time. MicroDAQ.com was allegedly running Google Adwords campaigns, such that an internet user searching on of Control Solutions’ trademarks, trade names and/or product names/numbers would receive as a search result a reference and hyperlink to MicrDAQ’s website and purchasing system instead of Control Solutions’. In March 2015, MicroDAQ.com’s sales & marketing manager replied to a cease and desist letter. In the reply, the manager admitted to running at least two such campaigns and promised to stop the campaigns. Control Solutions claims that the ad campaigns resulted in lost sales as well as lost future revenue since a portion of the company’s revenue is derived from recertifying devices sold to customers.

Control Solutions Inc. v. Microdaq.com Inc. et al

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00748-PK
File Date: Friday, May 01, 2015
Plaintiff: Control Solutions Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Gano D. Lemoine III of Lemoine Law Firm
Defendant: Microdaq.com Inc., Does 1-10
Cause: Unlawful Business/Trade Practices, Civil Action by Private Party, Trademark Counterfeiting, Remedies for Infringement, Injunctive Relief, Interference with Prospective Business Advantage, Intentional Interference with Economic Relations, Common Law Trademark Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Federal Statutory False Designation of Origin, Misrepresentation in Commercial Advertising or Promotion
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Paul Papak

Another BitTorrent Download Case

Tags

, , ,

Carl Crowell has filed yet another BitTorrent copyright case, this time for The Humbling, starring Al Pacino. When searching for information about this film, be careful to search for Humbling, not Humbler. This is a pretty standard BitTorrent copyright complaint filed by Crowell.

A&T SPVH, Inc. v. Doe

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00728
File Date: Thursday, April 30, 2015
Plaintiff: A&T SPVH, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell of Crowell Law
Defendant: Doe
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge John Jelderks

American Heist Download Cases Filed

Tags

, , ,

Carl Crowell has filed yet another round of complaints for Voltage Pictures, this time for the BitTorrent downloads of the film American Heist, starring Hayden Christensen and Adrien Brody.

Voltage Pictures LLC et al v. Doe

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00668-SB, -00669-SB
File Date: Monday, April 20, 2015
Plaintiff: Voltage Pictures LLC, Glacier Films USA Inc., Glacier Films 1 LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: Carl D. Crowell, Drew P. Taylor of Crowell Law
Defendant: Doe
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman

Sample Complaint:

Oregon Trademark Litigation Update – adidas America v. Marc Jacobs International

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Does trademark protection of Adidas’ famous “Three-Stripe Mark” also extend to four stripes? Fashion designer Marc Jacobs is ready to debate that question in Oregon federal court.

Some media coverage of the lawsuit, with images: de zeen, NY Post

Stay tuned for updates.

adidas America Inc. et al v. Marc Jacobs International LLC

Court Case Number: 3:15-cv-00582
File Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2015
Plaintiff: adidas America Inc.adidas AG
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen M. Feldman, Kristina J. Holm of Perkins Coie LLP
Defendant: Marc Jacobs International LLC
Cause: Federal Trademark Infringement, Federal Unfair Competition, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices, Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition, Federal Trademark Dilution, State Trademark Dilution
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Magistrate Judge Paul Papak

Oregon Copyright Litigation Update – Pinnacle Alliance Group v. Ambient Architecture

Tags

, , ,

Plaintiff Pinnacle Alliance Group, LLC (“Pinnacle”) owns the copyright on architectural plans and designs for a senior housing facility originally planned for Sisters, Oregon. In 2011, after spending upwards of $700,000 studying the site and preparing original layouts, Pinnacle submitted their plans to the City of Sisters for review and approval. The plans were also submitted to Ageia Health Services during negotiations for Ageia to serve as the management company for the future senior center. In 2013, Pinnacle lost its opportunity to develop the site and now they allege that Defendant Ambient Architecture (d/b/a Ascent) obtained the copyrighted blueprints. Exhibit A is some of the Pinnacle plan and Exhibit B is the plan that Ascent prepared for a different developer. Pinnacle is asking for $700,000, to cover the money already spent, as well as all profits that Ascent earned on this project.

Pinnacle Alliance Group, LLC v. Ambient Architecture LLC et al

Court Case Number: 6:15-cv-00451
File Date: Wednesday, March 18, 2015
PlaintiffPinnacle Alliance Group, LLC
Plaintiff CounselJeffrey M. Edelson of Markowitz Herbold Glade & Mehlhaf, PC
DefendantAmbient Architecture LLC, Seth E Anderson, Krista Appleby
Cause: Copyright Infringement
Court: District of Oregon
Judge: Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 167 other followers