- Journal Archives
- Volume 17
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
As our blog’s fearless leader, Brad Edmondson, pointed out in this week’s Monday Morning JETLawg [you're too kind! --ed.], King.com, the developers of such viral games as Candy Crush Saga, applied for a trademark for “Candy” in relation to a wide variety of goods and services. The game developer applied for the trademark back in February of 2013, but the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) approved the application for publication, and it will be published for opposition on February 25. For those who are unaware of what this means, when a party files for a trademark, an examining attorney basically takes a look at it, judges it to make sure it isn’t generic or descriptive, checks the database for confusingly similar marks, and then if everything seems okay, approves it for publication. Once approved for publication, the USPTO puts out a Gazette that includes the mark. Other parties that own registered trademarks may oppose the mark for any number of reasons, including consumer confusion.
King.com is approved for publication in the following international categories (including truncated descriptions):
- International Class 009: Apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; Blank magnetic data carriers and recording discs; Blank magnetic disks, pre-recorded magnetic disks featuring computer games; Compact discs, DVDs and video recordings featuring computer games; Calculating machines, Data processing equipment, namely, couplers, Computers; Computer game software for video and computer games . . .
- International Class 025: Clothing, namely, aprons, bandanas, bath robes, bathing caps, bathing suits, bathing trunks, beachwear, beach shoes, belts, bibs not of paper, boots, caps, headwear, coats, dresses, dressing gowns, ear muffs, football boots, gloves, hats, headbands, jackets, jumpers, pullovers, masquerade costumes, money belts, neckties, overalls . . .
- International Class 041: Educational services, namely, conducting classes, seminars, workshops in the field of computers, computer games; Training in the field of computers, computer games; Entertainment, namely, providing on-line computer games; Entertainment in the nature of computer games, namely, providing temporary use of non-downloadable computer games . . .
With the news of its pending publication, the creators of Candy Crush Saga have allegedly already begun attempting to prevent other game developers from using the term “Candy.” What is strange is that King.com already had a trademark in Candy Crush Saga; did it really need to broaden its claim? What does King.com have up its sleeve? Should we be expecting some “Candy” masquerade costumes and bathing suits? I guess we can only pray at this point.
This author would be surprised owners of other registered marks do not try to oppose King.com’s registration of “Candy.” Potentials include:
- Boat Candy (Reg. No 4470861)
- College Candy (Reg. No. 4470670)
- CCandy (Reg. No. 4471535)
- Candy Lipz (Reg. No. 4455472)
- Candy Man (Reg. No. 3893982)
. . . and thousands more. This isn’t the end of the Saga for King.com.
Recent Blog Posts
- Andy Samberg Shared His HBO Go Password & Broke the Internet… Here’s Why You Shouldn’t
- Fantasy or Nightmare? The Legality of Fanduel and DraftKings…
- Tweet Trimming
- Why the FAA failed to meet its deadline
- America’s Coming Electoral (Software) Crisis
- Patent Litigation: Damages, Patent Trolls, and Jury Confusion
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution