ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> IP Blawg

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: IP Blawg

Registration of LAWYERS.COM Trademark Denied

By Farella Braun + Martel LLP

ADVERTISEMENTS

As evidence that the term ?lawyers? is generic, at least from a trademark perspective, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (?TTAB?) recently affirmed the Trademark Office?s refusal to register the mark LAWYERS.COM on the ground that the mark is generic and thus not eligible for registration. In a lengthy opinion, the TTAB rejected numerous arguments advanced by the owner of the mark, Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., as to why the LAWYERS.COM mark is not generic and agreed with the Examiner that the mark should not appear on either the Principal Register or the Supplemental Register.

The application seeking registration of LAWYERS.COM initially described the services covered by the mark as ?providing access to an online interactive database featuring information exchange in the fields of lawyers, law, legal news, and legal services.? After several preliminary rejections by the Examiner, amendments to the description ? including deletion of the reference to ?lawyers? ? requests to register the mark on the Supplemental Register and arguments made to the Examiner, the Examiner issued a final rejection. The applicant appealed to the TTAB.

In determining whether the LAWYERS.COM mark is generic, the TTAB identified the critical issue to be ?whether the record shows that members of the relevant public primarily use or understand the term sought to be registered to refer to the genus of goods or services in question.? The TTAB accepted the Examiner?s characterization of the genus of the services identified as ?providing information about lawyers and, in fact, is offered for the express purpose of assisting the individual in selecting a lawyer.? It also concluded that members of the relevant public would understand applicant?s web site as providing information about lawyers. Accordingly, since the TTAB found that members of the relevant public would understand the term LAWYERS.COM to refer to the genus of the services in question, it concluded that the mark is generic and affirmed the Examiner?s rejection of the mark for registration.

Assuming the applicant applies to the Federal Circuit, what do you think the court will do? Should the mark LAWYERS.COM be registered?

Today's Blogger:  Bob Sloss

Full post as published by IP Blawg on January 10, 2006 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0132 secs (new cache)