The notion of ornamental trademark use is foreign to many cannabis businesses. This is unfortunate, because it’s an important issue to understand in the cannabis industry, where the only federal trademark protection we can obtain is for ancillary goods and services. (See here for the limitations of federal trademark protection in the cannabis industry.) The issue of
Tobacco paraphernalia is in many cases indistinguishable from cannabis paraphernalia, especially when products are unconnected to specific consumers. If an item can be used in both lawful and unlawful ways, it seems illogical to classify it as drug paraphernalia, unless the item is connected to illegal activity. Yet the approach of the U.S. federal authorities
Deceptive matter is yet another pitfall faced by canna brands as they take steps to protect their intellectual property. According to the U.S. Trademark Act (commonly known as the Lanham Act), such matter may not be registered as a trademark (15 U.S.C. § 1052(a)). While to some extent this is a commonsense rule that seeks
A final judgment recently rendered in WM. Wrigley Jr. Company v. Roberto Conde, et al., is nothing short of a cautionary tale and a powerful reminder to cannabis companies: Parody is NOT a defense to trademark infringement in this type of commercial context. The parties We all know Wrigley – it’s a titan in the
While patent protection has been generally available for some time now, we’ve covered why patent protection has been largely limited for the cannabis industry (see this post). However, that isn’t going to stop patent infringement actions from reaching cannabis businesses, as can be seen from a recent case filed by a greenhouse builder. The complaint
In this post, we will answer the cannabis patent questions that were submitted to us. Please visit our Cannabis Intellectual Property page for more information about protecting your brand. What do you think about using the Plant Variety Protection Act to protect strains? The Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) can provide protection for both asexually
Editor’s Note: A version of this article by Fred Rocafort was first published on Law360. The U.S. Constitution’s free speech protections, found in the First Amendment, may present a legal recourse for cannabis brands in trouble for using marks that are similar to famous trademarks. To be clear, a free speech argument will not be
On the heels of our recent intellectual property webinar, we received some requests for real world examples of how trademark infringement litigation plays out in the courts. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on how you see things), trademark infringement litigation cases are filed on an almost daily basis throughout the country, and this one filed this
Patents are increasingly a significant proportion of a cannabis company’s claimed valuation. As cannabis companies identify ways to differentiate their business from competitors, patents play an important role in ensuring that competitors cannot duplicate their products or processes. Patents are often used to insulate products from direct competition by building temporary barriers to prevent competitors
Just last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s holding that the 2018 Farm Bill legalized delta-8 THC products derived from hemp. In the Ninth Circuit’s view, “the plain and unambiguous text of the Farm [Bill] compels the conclusion that the delta-8 THC products before us are lawful.”
