Today’s post is a mix of trademark developments. First, King County today unveiled its new logo, changing from its longstanding “castle” and “crown” designs to the silhouette of the late Martin Luther King, Jr. This is a great way to honor a great man. The only thing giving me pause is something I heard early this morning on the radio. Maybe it was daylight savings time messing with me, but I thought I heard the reporter say the County predicted Dr. King’s family would be happy with the tribute. Wait a second. Tell me someone got the family’s permission before it appropriated Dr. King’s likeness. Imagine if the family didn’t approve. It’s doubtful, but it would be a debacle.
Also today, the 43(B)log discussed the Western District’s refusal to dismiss the plaintiff’s geographic misdescriptiveness claim in Baden Sports, Inc. v. Kabushiki Kaisha Molten, et al., No. 06-0210, 2007 WL 703394 (W.D. Wash.). In this case, which STL discussed in a different context in January, the plaintiff asserted that defendant’s failure to affix a country of origin mark onto its basketballs constituted unfair competition. Judge Marsha Pechman agreed that failing to do so is actionable under the Lanham Act. But the court could not determine on the briefs whether the failure was chargeable to the defendant or a non-party distributor. The
43(B)log’s analysis is available here.
Next, I couldn’t pass up TMBrandingCap’s link to an article entitled, “How the Band Protects Its Brand: The Use of Trademarks to Protect and Promote the Musical Artist.” Having recently posted on the subject (here, here, and here), I can say this is an article I wish I had written. It’s the first of a two-part series. Suffice it to say, I’m looking forward to part two.
Finally, I learned today that Washington’s Consumer Protection Act won’t be amended in this legislative session. Apparently, SB-5815, which would have increased to $50,000 the amount of exemplary damages available to plaintiffs proving unfair competition, ran out of time this weekend and won’t be pursued. STL’s discussion of the bill is available here.