Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> The Trade Secrets Vault

Intellectual Property Law

: The Trade Secrets Vault

Misappropriation of trade secrets : the INNER PEACE MOVEMENT case

Background: Estate and two for-profit corporations that had been owned by testator brought action against two non-profit corporations that testator had founded alleging service mark infringement, copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and conversion. Non-profit corporations counterclaimed alleging fraudulent trademark registration, trademark infringement, deceptive trade practices in violation of Lanham Act, violation of local law which required that annual board meetings comply with by-laws, unlawful trade practices under local law, common law unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and conversion. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted summary judgment for defendants. Plaintiffs appealed. Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) fact issues existed as to whether founder of non-profit corporations controlled service marks under related companies doctrine and in what capacity he registered those marks; (2) non-profit corporation could be related company under Lanham Act whose use of trademark was controlled by mark's registrant, without formal corporate control; (3) founder of non-profit corporations did not necessarily register service marks in representative capacity on behalf of non-profit corporations; (4) plaintiffs could be required to pay cost of mailing "remedial notices" pursuant to temporary restraining order; (5) potential for significant and irreparable harm to non-profit corporation existed in absence of temporary restraining order; (6) likelihood of success was substantial on Lanham Act deceptive trade practices counterclaim; (7) public interest was served by issuing temporary restraining order to prevent people from being deceived into attending competing board meeting under same name of non-profit corporation; and (8) plaintiffs likely would not be harmed by issuing temporary restraining order to prevent people from being deceived into attending their competing board meeting under same name of non-profit corporation. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Full post as published by The Trade Secrets Vault on June 09, 2008 (boomark / email).