When conflicts arise between trademark owners, it is advisable for them to explore different forms of written agreements that can address their specific concerns. By entering into a Consent Agreement, Concurrent Use Agreement, Coexistence Agreement, or Licensing Agreement, trademark owners can potentially avoid costly litigation expenses and the uncertainty of court outcomes. Furthermore, these agreements can serve as valuable evidence in trademark prosecution proceedings at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) or in proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
In fact, the main appellate court overseeing the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) has explicitly emphasized the significance of these agreements, particularly consent agreements. For further insights into the Federal Circuit Court's stance on this matter, refer to Bongrain International v. Delice de France, 811 F.2d 1479 1 USPQ2d 1775, 1778 (Fed. Cir. 1988). According to the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, a Consent Agreement is defined as an agreement between two parties where one party consents to the registration of a trademark by the other party, or where both parties consent to the use of identical or similar trademarks (TMEP §1207.01(d)(viii)).
Such evidence can be highly persuasive when challenging a refusal to register at the USPTO. As demonstrated in In re Four Seasons Hotel Ltd., 26 U.S.P.Q.2d 1071, 1074 (Fed. Cir. 1993), the Federal Circuit Court stated that, in the absence of conflicting evidence, a Consent Agreement serves as proof that there is no likelihood of confusion. However, for a Consent Agreement to be valid, it must not be a mere "naked Consent Agreement." A naked agreement occurs when one party simply consents to the registration or use of the trademark without providing an explanation as to why it would not lead to confusion. A credible Consent Agreement will conclusively demonstrate that simultaneous use of the two trademarks will not result in consumer confusion. This is often due to the lack of close relationship between the goods or services or the presence of different trade channels. Future disputes are typically not addressed in a Consent Agreement since the primary objective is to secure trademark registration.
Concurrent Use Agreements are established when two parties are utilizing similar or identical trademarks for similar or identical goods or services, but they mutually agree to restrict their usage to specific geographic areas. In such cases, an applicant can seek a trademark registration with a geographic limitation at the USPTO. By imposing this geographical restriction, the potential for confusion in the marketplace is effectively minimized. These agreements commonly arise in the context of trademark prosecutions.
Coexistence Agreements come into play when two parties possess trademark rights in separate geographic regions or for unrelated goods or services. These agreements may face rejection by a court if it determines that they fail to prevent consumer confusion. Typically, such situations arise during scenarios like mergers or acquisitions, product line expansions, or geographic expansions. One drawback of these agreements is the potential dilution of the trademark, as enforcing intellectual property rights against third parties might become more challenging when allowing mark usage under a Coexistence Agreement. Complex issues must be addressed within the agreement, including restrictions on internet sales, ownership of domain names, limitations on adopting new derivative word marks, proving abandonment of rights, and determining the party with the right to enforce the mark against third parties.
Getting in touch is easy. Use the form below and request a free consultation today.
Unlike the aforementioned types of trademark agreements, a License Agreement permits the usage of a single trademark, with only one trademark owner (the licensor) and the mark serving as an indicator for a sole source. The key element of any License Agreement is the licensor's ability to maintain control over the quality of the licensee's goods or services. The license may involve a royalty based on a percentage of sales or could be royalty-free. When drafting a License Agreement, it is crucial to exercise caution and ensure that the provisions are sufficiently specific, allowing a court to interpret and enforce the license effectively.
If you need legal advice regarding your trademark rights, assistance with trademark prosecution, or representation in a domain name dispute, contact Wilson Whitaker Rynell. Our team of trademark lawyers has extensive experience in all aspects of trademark and copyright law, including the filing of trademark applications and representing clients in defense or prosecution before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Recognized in the legal industry as dedicated board-certified lawyers and Rising Stars.
Your project will be handled by legal experts every time. You will have the most experienced attorneys working for you.
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Thank You for Contacting Us!
Your information has been sent, and we will contact you shorlty...issues.
WILSON WHITAKER RYNELL
Oops, there was an error sending your message.
Please try again later.
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)