« No Judgment as a Matter of Law in Baden v. Molten False Advertising Case | Main | Wrestler "Warrior" Avoids Game Maker's Motion to Dismiss Trademark Claims »

No Temporary Restraining Order Enjoining Use of COMMON SENSE

When things are slow in Seattle…

…STL reports on trademark issues elsewhere. That’s what I’ve been doing for the last couple of days.

Here’s a new trademark decision from the Northern District of California. Plaintiff Common Sense Media, Inc., applied for a temporary restraining order against defendant Common Sense Issues, Inc., based on plaintiff’s allegations that defendant is infringing its registered trademarks, COMMON SENSE MEDIA and COMMON SENSE MEDIA and Design. In particular, plaintiff asked the court to temporarily restrain defendant from using its COMMON SENSE ISSUES mark or any similar designation.

On Jan. 25, Judge Claudia Wilken denied plaintiff’s application. She found that “CSM has not made a sufficient showing of likely success on the merits of its claims and of the immediate threat of irreparable harm to justify granting the relief it seeks. Although ‘Common Sense Issues’ is similar to CSM’s trademarks, the phrase, ‘common sense’ is not unique, and the field of registered trademarks including the phrase is crowded. Many of these marks consist of the phrase, ‘common sense’ followed by a generic descriptive word similar to the word, ‘issues.’”

The court also found “it does not appear that the services provided by CSM and CSI are so closely related that the public would reasonably believe they come from the same source. CSM is a nonpartisan organization that provides information services related to children and the media. CSI is a political action group that provides voters with information on the positions of presidential candidates with respect to particular issues. While CSM argues that nothing would prevent CSI in the future from providing information on issues related to children and the media, this possibility cannot serve as the basis for a present claim of trademark infringement.”

Finally, the court concluded plaintiff had not shown it would suffer irreparable harm if the requested temporary restraining order did not issue.

The case cite is Common Sense Media, Inc. v. Common Sense Issues, Inc., 2008 WL 220120, No. 08-0155 (N.D. Calif.).

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.