The 2011 ImagePower Global Green Brands Study conducted by Cohn & Wolfe, Landor Associates, Penn Schoen Berland Associates, and Esty Environmental Partners identified the “greenest” companies in the United States. The Top 10 “Green” companies are:
You may view the results here.
Lombard & Geliebter is pleased to announce that Darren received the New York Enterprise Report‘s award for Best Attorney for Growing Businesses in the field of Intellectual Property. Darren received his award earlier this evening at the New York Enterprise Report’s program at the Tump Soho.
Congratulations, Darren. Great job!
A week after Apple was sued by iCloud Communications for the name of its upcoming cloud service, iCloud, NYC publisher John T. Colby is claiming that he has used the name long before Apple popularized the it. In fact, he has sued Apple over the name.
According to Bloomberg:
Colby bought in 2006 and 2007 the assets of various entities owned by New York publisher Byron Preiss, who had published more than 1,000 hardcover and paperback books under the “ibooks” name starting in September 1999, according to the lawsuit, which was filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan today.
Not surprisingly, no comment from Apple.
After 30 years in bureaucratic limbo, the FDA has approved new rules, published today, intended to alleviate consumer confusion about sunscreen effectiveness.
In order to claim they protect against skin cancer, sunscreen manufacturers will have to prove they filter out bothultraviolet B rays and ultraviolet A rays. Additionally, any sunscreen with an SPF of 15 or less will have to bear the following warning: ”This product has been shown only to help prevent sunburn, not skin cancer or early skin aging.”
The key takeaway for consumers: Look for a sun protection factor, or SPF, of 15 and above that also says “broad spectrum.” That’s the new buzzword from the Food and Drug Administration to describe a product that does an acceptable job blocking both types of damaging rays.
The new regulations require that sunscreens be tested for the ability to block the more dangerous ultraviolet A rays, which can penetrate glass and pose the greatest risk of skin cancer and premature aging. Currently, the FDA requires testing for only ultraviolet B rays that cause sunburn. The current SPF labeling system only deals with ultraviolet B rays.
Under the new rules:
• The FDA will prohibit sunscreen marketing claims like “waterproof” and “sweatproof,” which the agency said “are exaggerations of performance.”
• The FDA also proposes capping the highest SPF value at 50, unless companies can provide results of further testing that support a higher number.
• FDA says manufacturers must phase out a four-star system currently used by some companies to rate UVA protection.
After reviewing more than 3,000 public comments, the agency concluded the star system was too confusing for consumers. Instead, protection against UVA should be proportional to protection against UVB, which is already measured using SPF.
For an interesting take on Apple and Apple’s trademark filing, check out The Atlantic‘s article here entitled “Steve Job’s Freakiest Trademarks”.
Lombard & Geliebter is pleased to announce that partner Darren Geliebter was nominated and has been selected as a finalist for “Best Attorney for Growing Businesses” in the intellectual property field for 2011 by the well-respected The New York Enterprise Report (“NYER”). The dinner and awards ceremony will take place on Thursday, 16 June 2011 at the Trump Soho in Manhattan. For information about the ceremony, please see here. We wish Darren luck.
Lombard & Geliebter successfully obtained an order transferring two (2) infringing domain names to our client. Shortly after news stories emerged indicating that Sanofi-Aventis was interested in acquiring Genzyme, Inc., the respondent registered sanofi-genzyme.us and sanofigenzyme.us with GoDaddy.com. At Sanofi-Aventis’ request, L&G instituted usDRP proceeding with the National Arbitration Forum on 2 May 2011 seeking transfer of sanofi-genzyme.us and sanofigenzyme.us to Sanofi-Aventis [Sanofi-Aventis is now Sanofi.]
Having filed the complaint, the Panelist issued his decision on 8 June 2011 ordering the transfer of sanofi-genzyme.us and sanofigenzyme.us to Sanofi-Aventis. The Panelist’s decision may be found here. We successfully argued and established the three (3) elements required in all domain name disputes, specifically, 1) the domain names are confusingly similar to the complainant’s marks, 2) that the respondent did not possess any legitimate rights or interest in the disputed domain names and 3) the domain names were registered and/or being used in bad faith.
Having successfully established these three (3) elements, the Panel ordered the transfer of the domain names to Sanofi-Aventis/Sanofi. If you have any questions or would like assistance in connection with your own domain name matters, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Marty Sitzer asks if you are delivering on your brand’s promise? Despite a great product (or service), a clever trademark and a catchy slogan, failing to deliver on your promise, according to Sitzer, can result in disappointing sales.
To evaluate your brand promise, Sitzer recommends you start by examining either the implied or explicit promise you make as a company: What does your brand promise?
Then, ask yourself
“I am certainly not suggesting that you have a tag line that reads ‘half-assed service any time all the time’ but likewise if you are promising ‘unparalleled performance’ and you are only performing at industry standard, then that is just as much of a problem, and not something that will go unnoticed by your customers or prospects,” says Sitzer.
It makes sense to me. As you create new trademarks, consider whether your potential trademarks align with the promise you are making.
Apple Sued Over iCloud
Friday, June 10th, 2011In the same week that Apple announced its plans to launch its iCloud service later this year (as a replacement to its less-than-impressive MobileMe service), Apple has been slapped with a lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed yesterday in U.S. District Court in Arizona by iCloud Communications, LLC. The suit alleges:
A copy of the complaint may be found here.
Relatedly, German company, Simfy, has filed a lawsuit against Apple, claiming Apple rejected its iPod app (yes, “app” means application) because Simfy is a potential competitor to Apple’s iCloud service.
While Apple certainly markets its i-formative marks and products better than its competitors, Apple has rarely been first to market with many of those i-formative marks.
For example:
Let’s not forget Apple chose Mighty Mouse as the name for its first wireless mouse despite the fact that Mighty Mouse is a famous and iconic 20th Century Fox character.
Finally, McIntosh Labaratory had been using McIntosh as a trademark for audio, video and stereo equipment since 1978. Apple’s first application for MacIntosh was not filed until 1984.
In all fairness, Apple does seem to be the first to have used and filed for iTunes. (Even a broken clock has the right time twice a day.)
Despite Apple’s origins (or at least its original marketing stance) as an anti-establishment company (see its first ad here), Apple has become that which it first advertised against 25 years ago.
We suspect that Apple will ultimately pay iCloud Communications to own (or license) the mark iCloud. It should nonetheless be an interesting case to follow.
Posted in Commentary, Infringement, Litigation, News, Technology, Trademarks | No Comments »