Sara Gold

On September 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a much-awaited ruling reversing the trial court’s dismissal of trademark claims filed by Trader Joe’s against the labor union Trader Joe’s United. The grocery franchise specifically protested the union’s sale of tote bags and other merchandise bearing the name “Trader Joe’s United.”  According to Trader Joe’s, this was a commercial use that caused consumer confusion related to sales of goods, thus exceeding the permissible function of simply identifying the union as being Trader Joe’s-related. The lower court dismissed the claims, but the appellate court reversed, on the basis that the merit of the claims could not be decided at such an early stage.

If you happened to see the new Netflix show “Running Point,” starring Kate Hudson, that was made possible by a last-minute decision of a California federal court on the eve of the show’s February 27 release. Pepperdine University, in an emergency motion filed one week before the show’s release, asked the court to block the release due to trademark violations occurring within the series. The court denied the motion, and the series is now the number one TV show on Netflix as of this writing. Although the emergency motion was denied, proceedings will continue, and it is yet to be seen whether Pepperdine may ultimately succeed on some or all of its claims against Netflix and Warner Bros.

By now, most IP practitioners are familiar with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June 2023 in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products, Inc. The highly publicized ruling came after almost a decade of litigation between the parties over VIP’s “Bad Spaniels” parody dog toy designed to mimic a bottle of Jack Daniel’s. The ruling addressed VIP’s defenses to trademark infringement and trademark dilution. The High Court ruled that VIP had no defense to either cause of action…. But the story does not end there. It continues on remand in Arizona federal court, where this case first began a decade ago in 2014. The litigation that has unfolded in the past year foretells the downstream implications of the Supreme Court ruling, particularly for trademark dilution law.

Celebrity tattoo artist Kat Von D recreated a photograph of a famous musician in ink on her client’s arm and posted photos of the process online. Netflix docuseries “Tiger King” incorporated video footage of a real-life funeral as part of its documentary coverage of the deceased’s husband. The two parties were sued separately for copyright infringement—of the photograph, in Kat Von D’s case, and the video, in Netflix’s case.