North America

Eduardo Kleinberg and Santiago Zubikarai of Basham evaluate the new industrial property legislation under consideration in Mexico, assessing changes to the law on damages, fines, the registration of trademarks and patents

In Fifth Generation Inc. v Titomirov Vodka LLC, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a precedential ruling, granting Fifth Generation's motion for summary judgment as a sanction in view of Titomirov Vodka's failure to comply with the TTAB's orders, as well as its pattern and practice of avoiding its discovery obligations.

A problem that impacts day to day in our country, and specifically the owners of trademarks, is the deficient or lack of regulation in our legislation regarding what is and what should be understood by "use of a trademark", "use of a trademark in accordance with the customs and habits" and "effective use v token use".

In In re Odd Sox LLC, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a precedential ruling, holding that the term "generic name" as used in the Trademark Act encompasses product packaging, and that the generic inquiry is applicable to assessments of source identification capabilities of product packaging.

The Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (the IMPI) denied applications for the mark "Pinche Gringo BBQ" and design to Daniel Andrew Defossey and Roberto Luna Aceves, on the grounds of Article 4 of the Industrial Property Law (LPI). It stated that the mark was contrary to public order, morality and good customs. The term "Pinche" is a pejorative word and "Gringo" refers to a person born in the United States, especially one who is English-speaking. However, interestingly, the real meaning of "Pinche" is a person who provides services in the kitchen or an assistant cook.

In Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. v Goldsmith et al. No. 17-CV-2532, 2019 (S.D.N.Y. July 1 2019), the US District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed the question of whether Andy Warhol's (Warhol) use of a photograph of Prince Rogers Nelson, best known as Prince, constituted violations of the Copyright Act. Granting the Andy Warhol Foundation's (AWF) motion for summary judgment, the court found that although the at-issue photograph was protected by copyright, AWF had a viable fair use defence.