United States:
Belmora v. Bayer: Does The Lanham Act Protect An Owner Of A Well-Known Foreign Mark From Intentional Misuse Of The Mark In The U.S.?
06 January 2016
WilmerHale
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
In Belmora LLC v. Bayer Consumer Care AG,1
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is faced with
novel issues about the reach of the Lanham Act. The case arose from
Bayer's filing of a petition to cancel Belmora's registered
trademark FLANAX on the grounds that Belmora's use of that mark
deceives consumers into believing that its FLANAX pain relief
product is from the same source as the FLANAX product that Bayer
has sold in Mexico for over four decades.
Please click here to continue reading the full text of this
article
Originally published in BNA's Patent, Trademark &
Copyright Journal, 01/01/2016
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Intellectual Property from United States
Are Your NDAs Up To Date?
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) can be used to protect companies' confi dential and trade secret information. But you should resist the urge to have a vendor...
Legal Implications Of New York Times vs. OpenAI
BoyarMiller
The New York Times recently filed a landmark lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing them of copyright infringement in the training of the chatbot ChatGPT which launched just over a year ago.