25 July, 2024 Revista Digital sobre Patentes, Marcas y Propiedad Intelectual

Although will.i.am. “Scream and Shout”, the Trademark Office won´t register “I AM”

Synopsis: This article will approach the decision of the Federal Circuit, where the Court affirmed the TTAB refusal of the “I AM” trademark registration.

This is “THE E.N.D”. This month, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) decision issued in 2015 where the TTAB, in a precedential decision, refused the registration of three trademark applications for I AM from i.am.symbolic, llc., for cosmetic and personal products in class 3, for sunglasses and sunglass cases in class 9, and for jewelry, watches, and other goods, including rubber wristbands in the nature of bracelets in class 14.

The TTAB decision was particularly interesting because it involved several Intellectual Property issues; including right of publicity, famous marks and a different perspective from the TTAB of confusion rejections for trademarks.

The applicant of the I AM marks is a company owned by pop star William Adams, an American musician known by his stage name “will.i.am” as the front man of the music group The Black Eyed Peas.

In the cases decided by the board, it concluded that I AM was confusingly similar to the registered marks I AM for perfume in class 3 owned by Danica Siegel, I AM and design for sunglasses and sunglass cases in class 9, I AM and design for jewelry and fashion jewelry, bracelets, watches, and other goods in class 14, both owned by Beeline GmbH, and I AM for silicone stretchable wrist band in the nature of a bracelet in class 14 owned by Justin Finch.

In the description of the goods protected by the I AM marks, the applicant included the language “all associated with William Adams, professionally known as ‘will.i.am.’” Therefore, before the board, the applicant contended that there was no likelihood of confusion between the I AM marks and the cited marks because its marks identified the pop star “will.i.am”; applicant’s goods were exclusively associated with “will.i.am”; the goods protected by the conflicting marks were marketed differently; and the cited marks were not famous.

The main reason the board refused the registration of the I AM marks was because the language included in the product’s description did not limit applicant’s goods in any fashion with respect to either the trade channels or class of purchasers because the board held it was “precatory” language and not binding consumers when they encountered applicant’s marks. In other words, the mentioned language did not represent that “will.i.am” was identified in the promotion of the goods because the applicant was trying to register the mark I AM, not WILL.I.AM.

 

In this regard, the board noticed that in three different trademark registration for WILL.I.AM in classes 9, 41 and 25 owned by Mr. Adams and subsequently transferred to i.am.symbolic llc., the registration included ,a statement that “[t]he name shown in the mark identifies a living individual whose consent to register is of record”, while in the I AM applications such statement was not included. Notwithstanding the above, the board held that even when the applications had included the statement, the statue still protects the senior user from “reverse confusion” of a newcomer.

Moreover, as indicated earlier, applicant argued without providing any evidence that the I AM marks were famous, while the cited marks were not. However, the board explained that in an ex parte analysis, in the absence of proofs the fame of the mark factor is treated as neutral. In other words, the board concluded that “to the extent that Mr. Adams and applicant’s mark are well known, such fact supports refusal of applicant’s application because when confusion is likely, it is the prior registrant which must prevail.”

Now, before the Federal Circuit will.i.am asked for “One More Chance” and argued that the Board erred by: 1) characterizing the “will.i.am” limitation sought during prosecution as precatory and therefore omitted from the Board’s DuPont factor analysis; 2) ignoring third-party use and the peaceful coexistence of the primary and supplemental registers; and 3) finding a likelihood of reverse confusion.

Notwithstanding Mr. Adam´s contentions, the Court said “Shut Up” to will.i.am and found that the Board sufficiently supported its reasoning when it applied the DuPont factors.  Regarding the first DuPont factor, the similarity of the marks weighed heavily in favor of confusion because the word marks were identical (both being “I AM”). The analysis considered the applied-for and registered marks, not the “will.i.am” version that Adams argued should have been considered.  Any failure to consider third-party use was harmless, given the strength of the evidence supporting a finding of confusion, such as the use of identical marks. The Court also rejected Adams’ argument that the Board improperly found a likelihood of reverse confusion.  Instead, the Board’s opinion “merely explains that to the extent the Board agreed with [Adams] that [he] or the mark are famous, such a finding would not support registration of the mark.” Now, will.i.am can “Go Home” without a trademark registration for “I AM”.

Arturo Ishbak Gonzalez

Prolongación Paseo de la Reforma #1000, Ciudad de México.

[email protected]

Twitter: @ArturoIshbak

Comparte tu opinión sobre este artículo

Comentarios

Related Posts

El Tecnológico de Monterrey y la Biblioteca de México se unen para dar vida a “Ciudades que aprenden”: laboratorio de innovación ciudadana

30 noviembre, 2016

30 noviembre, 2016

Con 10 proyectos y 80 colaboradores nacionales e internacionales, “Ciudades que aprenden” apuesta por la transformación social. El evento de...

Mexicanos exponen innovaciones en la Feria Aeroespacial FAMEX 2017

3 mayo, 2017

3 mayo, 2017

Fuente: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Digital Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com La segunda edición de...

Buscan patentar concreto mexicano que limpia aire contaminado

26 mayo, 2017

26 mayo, 2017

Fuente: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Digital Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com Con la asesoría del...

Diseña El Colegio de Michoacán materiales orgánicos para restaura piezas de arte

10 febrero, 2017

10 febrero, 2017

Fuente: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com Obras de arte y bienes...

“Confianza, Confidencialidad y Propiedad Industrial”

25 julio, 2016

25 julio, 2016

FUENTE: ANA CECILIA RODRÍGUEZ LUNA, Ingeniero de Patentes,   Calderón&De la Sierra (Attorneys at law), Ciudad de México, (5255) 5047-7500, [email protected], www.cyslaw.mx Por su naturaleza...

Trump da tregua de tres meses para el veto a Huawei

21 mayo, 2019

21 mayo, 2019

La tregua retrasa hasta el 19 de agosto el veto con el que el gigante chino dejaría de recibir suministros estadounidenses

El lado oscuro de la tecnología: 16.8% de mexicanos sufrieron ciberacoso

10 abril, 2019

10 abril, 2019

Encuesta del INEGI revela que la mayor prevalencia de ciberacoso se registró en Tabasco, seguido de Veracruz, Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Aguascalientes e Hidalgo.

Con patente internacional, mexicanos manufacturan fragmentador de roca en Brasil y Panamá

5 septiembre, 2016

5 septiembre, 2016

Fuente: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com La empresa mexicana de pirotecnia y explosivos PyroSmart...

Hecho en México

27 marzo, 2017

27 marzo, 2017

Fuente: FERMÍN RODRIGO REYES FENTANES y RODRIGO VELARDE MIRANDA, Legarreta y Asociados, SC, www.legarreta.com.mx, [email protected]., [email protected], Ciudad de México, México....

¿Las Denominaciones de Origen son una ventaja competitiva para México?

11 enero, 2017

11 enero, 2017

Fuente: ENRIQUE ESCALERA CAMPOS, Departamento Jurídico, SELCO®, ”Tus ideas son negocio®” www.gruposelco.com, [email protected] Las denominaciones de origen son nombres o...

Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas identifica proteínas que predicen preeclampsia en mujeres embarazadas

10 marzo, 2017

10 marzo, 2017

Fuente: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com Científicos de la Universidad Autónoma...

FUNDAN EMPRESA TECNOLÓGICA PARA APROVECHAR HARINA DEL CAMOTE

27 julio, 2018

27 julio, 2018

AUTOR: ANTIMIO CRUZ BUSTAMANTE, Reportero de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Revista Digital Mi Patente, [email protected], www.mipatente.com Egresados de la Universidad...

¿Sabías que hay una máquina que convierte el aire en agua? ¡Conócela!

31 mayo, 2019

31 mayo, 2019

Un par de jóvenes sonorenses crearon una nube artificial que obtienen agua del aire debido a la condensación, lo que ayudará a que te olvides de los garrafones y botellas de agua

Jóvenes apuestan por la tecnología para combatir la inseguridad

15 abril, 2019

15 abril, 2019

HackLeón 2019 reunió a 350 personas entre participantes, mentores, líderes en el tema de seguridad del municipio de León, para generar ideas que permitieran atender la inseguridad.

Sorprende caída de meteorito en Uruapan

27 mayo, 2019

27 mayo, 2019

El registro fue aproximadamente a las 9:15 de la noche, cuando vecinos reportaron que escucharon un fuerte estruendo