Cohen Law, A PLC

Interesting story. First, I can't find any record of the guy on the CA Bar website, so I question whether or not he is actually a licensed, practicing attorney in the state of CA. Second, anyone who practices even a modicum of intellectual property law knows that you can register a brand in various classes of goods or services. If there is no reasonable relation between products or goods, 2 seemingly similar or even identical marks could be registered in 2 classes of goods... or services. For example, I could register "Apple Tires" and Apple Computers would likely not be able to stop me because the average consumer is not going to confuse tires with computers or ipods. This guy filed his application in Class 38 (Telecommunications services) and described his services as "communications by computer terminals, transmission and delivery of video, audio, and data via the internet." I think he would be hard-pressed to argue that the average consumer could confuse a product sold by Harry and Meghan with his alleged "telecommunications" services, were he able to successfully register the mark. That points to another potential hurdle this individual faces - in order to fully register a trademark, it must be used in commerce. His application was filed based on an "intent to use" - which means that he is not using it yet, but intends to at some point in the future. The USPTO will not register a mark until it has been used in commerce. And finally, as the article points out, Harry and Meghan have already filed applications through the WIPO, seeking protection in their home country of the UK and other countries through the WIPO under the Madrid Protocol. Assuming their mark registers in the UK (and why wouldn't it?), their applications in those other countries will be given priority over any other applications. See more

Attorneys Rob and Amy Cohen of Cohen Law, PLC in Valencia have both been named in January to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers list, each for the fourth consecutive year. Read more through the link below. https://bit.ly/2GW1Eys

We are pleased to announce that Rob Cohen and Amy Cohen have both been selected for inclusion on the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List, an honor reserved for the top 5% of attorneys in Southern California. This is Rob's 6th year being selected to this list (following 6 years of selection to the Super Lawyers Rising Stars list) and Amy's 4th year being selected (with 2 previous years on the Rising Stars list.) Congratulations to our attorneys Rob and Amy!

Amy M. Cohen, Esq. explains why an individual’s plan to trademark Harry & Meghan’s brand likely won’t work. Read our blog to find out more. https://bit.ly/2RDIpil

Interesting story. First, I can't find any record of the guy on the CA Bar website, so I question whether or not he is actually a licensed, practicing attorney in the state of CA. Second, anyone who practices even a modicum of intellectual property law knows that you can register a brand in various classes of goods or services. If there is no reasonable relation between products or goods, 2 seemingly similar or even identical marks could be registered in 2 classes of goods... or services. For example, I could register "Apple Tires" and Apple Computers would likely not be able to stop me because the average consumer is not going to confuse tires with computers or ipods. This guy filed his application in Class 38 (Telecommunications services) and described his services as "communications by computer terminals, transmission and delivery of video, audio, and data via the internet." I think he would be hard-pressed to argue that the average consumer could confuse a product sold by Harry and Meghan with his alleged "telecommunications" services, were he able to successfully register the mark. That points to another potential hurdle this individual faces - in order to fully register a trademark, it must be used in commerce. His application was filed based on an "intent to use" - which means that he is not using it yet, but intends to at some point in the future. The USPTO will not register a mark until it has been used in commerce. And finally, as the article points out, Harry and Meghan have already filed applications through the WIPO, seeking protection in their home country of the UK and other countries through the WIPO under the Madrid Protocol. Assuming their mark registers in the UK (and why wouldn't it?), their applications in those other countries will be given priority over any other applications. See more

An interesting commentary on the necessity of trials and a bit on where cases involving defamation on social media might be headed.

It will be interesting to watch how this progresses and what types of cases get assigned to this branch. Over the past 10 years, they have slowly whittled away the types of cases heard here because of the creation of "hubs" and cutting back on judicial staff.

Something to keep an eye on for those in employment law and those in the entertainment world. Traditionally, many on the talent side incorporate and then "loan-out" their services through their corporations to studios and production companies. This way, the studio avoids paying/treating the talent like an employee (for tax and other purposes) and the talent's corporation handles things. CA has long been hard on employers over employees to the point where some businesses struggle to stay here and keep their doors open. It will be interesting to see what the big studios do with this one.

This will be one to keep an eye on.

Proud to announce that both partners, Amy M. Cohen and Robert A. Cohen have been selected to the 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers list.

Proud to announce that attorneys Rob Cohen and Amy Cohen have both been selected to the 2018 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Amy and Rob have previously been selected to the Super Lawyers and Rising Stars lists for Southern California. Congratulations!

Very proud and excited to be part of this year's events.

Although the Supreme Court entered a decision, I expect this case is far from over. The article notes that the Court did not opine on whether or not the designs in question were "sufficiently original" to qualify for copyright protection. I anticipate that will be the next battle fought in this matter.

While you may not be as large as Pfizer, you likely have trade secret information worth protecting. It could be something as simple as pricing information, sales figures, or customer contacts. If it gives you an edge over your competition, it is a secret worth protecting. Some good tips here on how to start. Questions? Let me know.