Research in Motion settles trademark infringement lawsuit with Samsung

Blackberry maker Research in Motion has confirmed that they have now settled a lawsuit filed against Samsung Electronics related to their Blackjack trademark.

RIM had claimed that the Samsung’s Blackjack cell phones were infringing its trademarks to the blackberry range of telecom products. The company said in a statement: “RIM is very pleased to have reached a mutually beneficial settlement agreement that includes immediate provisions for the protection of RIM’s valuable trademarks.”

However, RIM has not released the specific terms of the agreement. The company just mentioned that the deal includes “limitations on use of the Blackjack trademark and withdrawal of the U.S. Trademark Application for Blackjack”.

CNBC 'Money Honey' seeks branding trademark

CNBC news anchor Maria Bartiromo wants to sweeten the pot on her "Money Honey" nickname, making it a brand on children's TV, piggy banks and cookie jars. Bartiromo filed several trademark applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to trademark her Money Honey moniker.

The trademark applications show that Bartiromo is casting a wide net. Besides kids' TV and books, the Money Honey trademark would appear on school supplies, DVDs, mouse pads, jigsaw puzzles, dolls, and backpacks, among other items. The applications were filed on Jan. 16.
Bartiromo was not available for comment.

Winnie the Pooh rights holder trying to force Disney to cancel trademark registrations

In the latest move in a long struggle with Walt Disney Co. over the rights to A.A. Milne's Winnie the Pooh, Stephen Slesinger Inc. petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to cancel Disney's trademark registrations over the 80-year-old bear and his friends.

Stephen Slesinger Inc. is a film production company named after the literary agent who bought merchandising and other rights to Winnie the Pooh from Milne in the 1930s. The company sued Disney in 1991 claiming that Disney owed it several hundred million dollars in royalties for Pooh movies and merchandise. Slesinger also sought to cancel its 1983 licensing agreement with Disney, citing alleged contract breaches. The case was dismissed in 2004, but Slesinger is appealing the dismissal.

In 2002, Disney's entertainment unit and Milne's granddaughter filed suit against Slesinger to terminate A.A. Milne's grant of the Pooh rights to the literary agent and his company. A district court ruled against Disney and Clare Milne's right to terminate Slesinger's rights, and an appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling. In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Disney's appeal.

Disney spokesman Jonathan Friedland said the allegations in Slesinger's petition to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are same they've made in their earlier case that was dismissed.
"This is by no means anything more than the 'same old, same old,'" he said.

Apple settles trademark dispute with The Beatles

Apple Inc. has settled its lengthy trademark dispute with The Beatles (music)-owned Apple Corps Ltd, which opens the door to the legendary rock band's music to be sold via Apple Inc.'s iTunes Music store.

The two companies have agreed that Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to the brand name "Apple" and its logos, and will "license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use," according to a press release. Both parties have also agreed to pay their own legal costs for the battle they had waged prior to the settlement.

"We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks," Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs said in a prepared statement. "It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future."

Apple Inc. and Apple Corps Ltd originally entered into an agreement in 1991, the language of which prohibited Apple Inc. from using the Apple trademark and logo in association with music sales; the company's offerings at the time were limited to computers. The recently settled dispute arose several years ago, after Apple Inc. launched its iTunes Music Store and iPod digital-music player, both of which have become the leaders of their respective markets.

Apple Corps Ltd--owned by Paul McCartney; Ringo Starr; John Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono; and the estate of the late George Harrison--continues to withhold The Beatles' work from the digital-music marketplace despite a major adoption of the format by most artists and record labels. The company announced last April that The Beatles' entire catalog was being digitally remastered in preparation for its yet-to-be-announced online release.

Whose iPhone is this?

Cisco Systems is suing Apple over the computer maker's use of the iPhone trademark. The two companies hadn't finished negotiations over the term when Apple's iPhone debuted at Macworld Expo. Now Cisco is seeking an injunction that will prevent Apple from using the name as well as damages from the company.

Cisco said in the complaint that Apple had attempted to get rights to the iPhone name several times, but after Cisco refused, the company created a front company to try to acquire the rights another way, according to the lawsuit (PDF: Cisco's trademark complaint.)

"We think Cisco's trademark suit is silly...We believe (their) trademark registration is tenuous at best," said Natalie Kerris, an Apple spokeswoman. "There are already several companies using the iPhone name for VoIP (voice over IP) products," Kerris said. "We're the first company ever to use iPhone for a cell phone. If Cisco wants to challenge us on it, we're confident we'll prevail."

Cisco said in its complaint that Apple had first approached the company about acquiring the rights to the iPhone trademark in 2001. Over the years, Apple continued to make requests for the rights, including several attempts in 2006, Cisco said.

"Each time, Apple was told that Cisco was not interested in ceding the mark to Apple," Cisco's complaint reads. Apple apparently was not willing to accept Cisco's decision, so it created a Wilmington, Del.-based front company called Ocean Telecom Services that applied to use the trademark in the U.S. on September 26, 2006, according to Cisco's complaint. That company, Cisco says in the filing, is "owned or otherwise controlled by Apple and is the alter ego of Apple."

"This was just brass balls on the part of Steve (Jobs), to go in there and just grab that trademark and not pay a license for it or negotiate. It's the height of arrogance," Kay said. "He basically thinks he can get away with it."

However, it's likely that the two companies will settle their differences, as prolonged litigation doesn't really serve either company, Kay said. "Apple is playing chicken with Cisco, and there's other companies I'd rather play chicken with," he said, referring to Cisco's deep pockets.