South Carolina Lawyers Weekly
Where a defendant that was sued for unfair competition under the Lanham Act argued the suit was filed too late, because a § 43(a) claim is equitable in nature, the affirmative defense of laches, rather than statute of limitations, was ...
Read More »Intellectual Property – Laches was defense to Lanham Act claim
Intellectual Property – End of challenged conduct moots injunction appeal 
Where NIKE stopped an advertising campaign after the district court found it infringed on Fleet Feet’s trademarks, NIKE’s cessation of the campaign mooted its appeal of the preliminary injunction. Background In 2019, NIKE Inc., NIKE USA Inc. and NIKE Retail ...
Read More »Intellectual Property – Apple prevails in dispute over use of ‘ipad’
Although a website operator began using “ipad” three years before Apple released its iPad in 2010, because Apple acquired use of the mark from another company that predated the website operator’s use, the mark obtained secondary meaning and Apple qualified ...
Read More »Intellectual Property – No trade dress protection for chicken feeder
Where the shape and color scheme of a chicken feeder served a functional purpose, the feeder was ineligible for trade dress protection. Background In this trade dress infringement case, CTB Inc. appeals rulings granting summary judgment in favor of Hog ...
Read More »Intellectual Property – Copyright Act – Termination Provisions – Trusts & Estates – Artist’s Widow – Special Administrator
Plaintiffs, James Brown’s adult children, allege that defendants—Brown’s widow, his youngest child, his estate’s personal representative, and the limited special administrator and limited special trustee of Brown’s estate and trust—have entered into agreements which violate the termination provisions of the ...
Read More »Intellectual Property – Trademark Infringement – Attorneys – Civil Practice – Preliminary Injunction – Appeals – Stay Motions – Arbitration
Because the court’s preliminary injunction does not impede the defendant-attorney’s ability to practice law—it only prohibits him from infringing on his father’s firm’s trademarks—the injunction does not implicate South Carolina Rule of Professional Conduct 5.6. The court grants plaintiff’s motion ...
Read More »Intellectual Property Case not ‘exceptional’ under Lanham Act
Where the district court’s conclusions that one party was prevailing and that this case was “exceptional” under the Lanham Act were both rejected, an award of attorneys’ fees was reversed. Background Citi Trends Inc. filed a declaratory judgement action against ...
Read More »Intellectual Property Copyright – Civil Practice – Declaratory Judgment – Trusts & Estates – James Brown Compositions
Plaintiffs allege that defendant Hynie has entered into an agreement which violates provisions of the Copyright Act, circumventing plaintiffs’ statutory interests while enhancing Hynie’s compensation. Plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to state a claim for a declaratory judgment. Defendants’ motion to ...
Read More »Intellectual Property Failure to disclose license for trademark was sanctionable
Where a company licensed the use of a trademark without disclosing that the company itself was under a license to use that mark, and failed to disclose the license at any point during the discovery process, barring the company from ...
Read More »Intellectual Property Trademark Infringement – Civil Practice – Preliminary Injunction – Attorneys
A son, who has the same name as his father (except for the “Jr.” designation), and who is in the same business – personal injury law – may not use marks that are confusingly similar to those that the father ...
Read More »