Snoop Dogg in legal fight with MLSE over Marijuana product line.

[Boreal]

http://www.tsn.ca/snoop-dogg-in-lega...-line-1.512291

HaHa!

[Resolute 14]

I'm on Snoop's side here. There is no chance whatsoever that allowing him that mark would be confusing to the customer or would harm the Maple Leafs' brand. They aren't even in the same category.

[Erick Estrada]

Can you even trademark something like a leaf which is a part of nature? I could understand if he used "Maple Leafs by Snoop" but the word "leaf" should not be able to be trademarked.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Part of the problem is that even if you're going to lose, there's value in defending your marks. This is why you get the bad look cases where big companies try to smash some local little concern with a similar name. Can't allow for the precedent where you've given an inch.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Can you even trademark something like a leaf which is a part of nature? I could understand if he used "Maple Leafs by Snoop" but the word "leaf" should not be able to be trademarked.

The mark has to be associated with an actual product.

So you can't trademark the word "apple" by itself. But you can trademark "Apple" as a computer and phone manufacturer, and therefore block any other computer or phone company from calling themselves "Apple". Likewise, Apple Computers can't prevent Apple Records (which owns the Beatles' library) from using the name - they operate in different industries and there is no risk of confusion between the two.

[Northendzone]

you have to be high to be a leafs fan anywyas.......I will show myself out now

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Can you even trademark something like a leaf which is a part of nature? I could understand if he used "Maple Leafs by Snoop" but the word "leaf" should not be able to be trademarked.

MLSE could make the case that the word Leafs is not generally accepted as a grammatically correct pluralization of the word leaf.

[Incogneto]

Leafs being pretty blunt in the lawsuit. They don't want their brand to go up in smoke.

[Huntingwhale]

I'm siding with Snoop Dogg because he is awesome.

[Komskies]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

I'm siding with Snoop Dogg because he is awesome.

Yes, yes he is.

[GoJetsGo]

Waiting for Big Tuna to come in and make some snide, smug comments siding with MLSE

[FlamesAddiction]

I can't see MLSE winning this. There is no ambiguity between the logos or products.

Great free advertising for Snoop though. I had no idea his product line even existed until now

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

Waiting for Big Tuna to come in and make some snide, smug comments siding with MLSE

Probably along the lines of before the Toronto Maple Leafs trees simply had green, blade like appendages and there was just regular syrup.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Part of the problem is that even if you're going to lose, there's value in defending your marks. This is why you get the bad look cases where big companies try to smash some local little concern with a similar name. Can't allow for the precedent where you've given an inch.

Even further, you have to police the even possible infringement of trademarks or you can lose your right to them.

[Finger Cookin]

Snoop will probably forget about this in a week or so and his venture will go nowhere.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Even further, you have to police the even possible infringement of trademarks or you can lose your right to them.

No, you really don't.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/1...ensor-internet

Relevant bit starts here:

Second, Canonical is not “required” to enforce its mark in every instance or risk losing it. The circumstances under which a company could actually lose a trademark—such as abandonment and genericide—are quite limited. Genericide occurs when a trademark becomes the standard term for a type of good (‘zipper’ and ‘escalator’ being two famous examples). This is very rare and would not be a problem for Canonical unless people start saying “Ubuntu” simply to mean “operating system.” Courts also set a very high bar to show abandonment (usually years of total non-use). Importantly, failure to enforce a mark against every potential infringer does not show abandonment.

[Drak]

Why don't they sue the Maple Leaf brand meat company while they're at it?

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

No, you really don't.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/1...ensor-internet

Relevant bit starts here:

The case discussed in that article was not an issue of potentially confusing trademarks and had a lot to do with free expression. Not the case here.

[SofaProfessor]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Snoop will probably forget about this in a week or so and his venture will go nowhere.

I know you're probably just joking but don't underestimate the business acumen of Snoop. The guy could never make another song and donate all of his music royalty cheques to charity and his pinky toe is still worth more than I'll make in 10 lifetimes. The guy has a stake in Reddit which was most recently valued at $4B. Even if he's only in it for 1% that's still $40M. And we haven't even mentioned all of the other, often cannabis themed, business ventures he's involved in.

[Finger Cookin]

I'm not disputing how much money he's earned. I'm just questioning his attention span.