Lewis Roca Blog

Well, that escalated quickly! Has your meme gone viral? Have you become a meme? Join our team as they discuss the intellectual property implications of memes. Even Grumpy Cat would approve.

Campaign rallies and political events are kicking off, and so are the cease and desist demands! Our team discusses many of the IP issues that politicians can find themselves in. Find out more in this episode.

Get the swear jar ready, because our hosts are pushing the envelope this episode! How far can trademarks go when the mark might include offensive language or imagery? Find out in this episode!

Social media influencers' name, image and likeness can be protected by “the right of publicity.” Intellectual property attorneys Oliver Bajracharya and Drew Wilson address the legal issues surrounding the right of publicity and how the law views this “right” which differs from state to state.

We're putting the band back together, man! Wait, who owns the name? What happens to the ownership between management and band members while the band is together and after they split up? Who can claim their legacy? Find out in this episode.

To protect or not to protect. Are tattoos subject to copyright protection? Can tattoos infringe a trademark? Join us as we explore the lines associated with intellectual property protection of tattoos and how those issues affect what tattoo artists, recipients, and even photographers need to keep in mind.

Join our panel of intellectual property lawyers as they discuss the IP litigation cases and issues associated with one of the hottest shows on Netflix - Tiger King. Hear how you can avoid some trademark pitfalls.

Working from home may mean working without convenient access to common office equipment such as printers and scanners.  As such, the situation lends itself to taking advantage of the USPTO’s acceptance of electronic “S-signatures” wherein documents can be signed without being printed.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) now requires all foreign-domiciled trademark applicants and registrants to retain licensed counsel in the United States to prosecute trademark applications, file post-registration maintenance documents, file submissions in Madrid applications, or respond to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) proceedings.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) new rule requiring foreign-domiciled trademark applicants, registrants, or trademark-proceeding parties to be represented by a U.S. attorney (84 FR 31498) took effect on August 3, 2019. The USPTO issued an accompanying initial Examination Guide in early August to help implement the rule. After taking into account responses …

The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) new rule requiring foreign-domiciled trademark applicants, registrants, or trademark-proceeding parties to be represented by a U.S. attorney (84 FR 31498) took effect on August 3, 2019. The USPTO issued an accompanying initial Examination Guide in early August to help implement the rule.

The United States, unlike many other countries, requires proof of use before a trademark registration will be granted.  Applicants can still file an application before use commences, provided that the applicant has a bona fide intent to use a mark, but the trademark registration still will not issue until acceptable use evidence is submitted. …

The impetus for the upcoming August 3, 2019 rule change requiring all foreign-domiciled trademark applicants and registrants to retain licensed counsel in the United States is an increase in foreign trademark applicants acting pro se and who are failing to comply with the rules of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”)....