Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

The purpose of this section is to discuss the Exam Guide: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods. Please leave all general comments here, with more specific comments in the appropriate subsection.

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

TMEP Sec. 1209.03(k) "Laudatory Terms"

I have found what seems like an interesting recent development in the TTAB’s handling of statements of “mere puffery” as laudatorily merely descriptive marks and the possible overruling of this practice by the CAFC in the recent Duopross case involving the SNAP SIMPLY SAFER mark (Duopross Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Medical Devices, Ltd., 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ), TTABlogged HERE. While preparing a response ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

1 vote
1 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Example 9 in Appendix (Macy's website)

The last bullet point states: • Webpage is not acceptable for goods given the presence of third party goods and marks therefor (e.g., “Cuisinart” and “Polo by Ralph Lauren”). The reason the webpage is not acceptable for goods is not because third party marks appear on the page, but because Macy's is not, in fact, the source of the goods shown. This should be revised to something like "webpage is not acceptable for goods ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

2 votes
2 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Example #4 (hypothetical web page)

The final bullet point reads: • If the proposed mark were “T.Markey Your Clothing Emporium” (as it appears in the upper left corner), the webpage would not be acceptable for goods because of the proximity and association of the other marks with the goods (i.e., “Teeyak” and “Keeping you cozy.”). Why does the "proximity and association of other marks with the goods" preclude the company's name in the upper left-hand corner ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Hitachi Comments to Draft Examination Guide on Webpage Specimen

Hitachi appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the draft Examination Guide on Webpage specimens. In comparison to specimen requirements in most countries around the world, the USPTO specimen criteria are very strict. Many companies offer products and services not only to the general public but also to industrial. Therefore, it would be helpful to include additional information in Examination Guide taking ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

2 votes
2 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Section 2.b.iv. “Presence of Other Marks.”

These comments pertain to section 2.b.iv. “Presence of Other Marks” in the draft Examination Guide on website displays. I appreciate that it is difficult to definitively identify factors that do, or do not, weigh for or against whether a particular website display qualifies as an acceptable specimen. It requires a nuanced analysis. However, I respectfully submit that proposed Section 2.b.iv is not helpful to the analysis ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

IBM's Comments re:Webpage Specimens

IBM thanks the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“Office”) for the opportunity to provide input and comments regarding Draft Examination Guide for Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated with the Goods (“Draft Guide”). IBM uses webpage specimens to show use of IBM trademarks in association with services, and less frequently to show use of IBM trademarks in association with goods. Webpage specimens play an ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

2 votes
2 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Webpage specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

In Section I(A)(1), it states "It should be noted that a webpage showing a picture of the packaging of the goods with the mark appearing on the packaging is an acceptable specimen and does not require a display analysis. " It should be amended as follows (IN CAPS)to reflect that not only a photo of the packaging is sufficient, a photo of the goods bearing the mark is also acceptable: "It should be noted that a webpage ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

1 vote
1 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Online Inquiry Forms

Another means for ordering (other than a Shopping Bag or Cart) can be provided through online "Inquiry Forms," particularly for technical goods for which the customer must provide product specifications or must inquire about the product specifications described on the webpage before making a purchase decision. Such forms should be deemed to constitute a "means for ordering" the goods, since such inquries are ofte the ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

3 votes
3 up votes
0 down votes

Campaign: Webpage Specimens as Displays Associated With the Goods

Adequacy of Corporate Contact Information

A telephone number or e-mail address that is posted on a website in association with goods (particularly highly technical goods) should be acceptable as a means for placing an order. In the Valenite case, a number for the Customer Service Group provided a sufficient means to qualify the website as a point of purchase display. As expressed by one of our clients, "no matter how the telephone number is shown on the website, ...more »

Submitted by

Voting

2 votes
2 up votes
0 down votes