- Posts by Mary L. Grieco
PartnerMary advises her clients in all facets of brand development, management and protection. Representing clients spanning the fashion, cosmetics, entertainment, financial services, technology, food, restaurant, and general ...
Following the lead of California, which passed the first comprehensive privacy legislation in the United States in 2018, many states have now enacted their own laws governing the collection and use of personal data. In addition to California, a comprehensive privacy law is effective in the following states as of 2024: Colorado, Connecticut, Montana, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. New laws go into effect in 2025 in Delaware, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Tennessee. Indiana, Kentucky, and Rhode Island have also passed comprehensive privacy laws that go into effect in 2026. There are active bills in the legislatures of Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The laws apply to businesses that collect personal information from consumers in those states regardless of where the business is located.
On November 18, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) officially published its Final Rule for filing and maintenance fee increases for 2025 (the “Final Rule”). In so doing, the USPTO added new fee categories and increased many of its existing fees. The purpose of the changes and increases, according to the Final Rule outlining the same, is to “provide the agency with sufficient financial resources to facilitate the effective administration of the U.S. trademark system.” It is noted in the Final Rule that many of the fees have not increased for over 20 years. The fees discussed below are the USPTO fees only. Of course, the fees mentioned below are just the government fees, and legal fees are extra.
Chair of Olshan’s Intellectual Property Law Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Mary Grieco and associate Morgan Spina published a New York Law Journal article entitled “The Long Road To Settling a Trademark Case: Proactive Steps for Success” about the lengthy, and often expensive, legal proceedings surrounding trademark disputes.
Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP today announced that 35 attorneys across all of the firm’s practices have been selected to the 2024 New York Metro Super Lawyers® list. Twenty-seven lawyers have been named as “Super Lawyers” and eight have been named as “Rising Stars.” While on average no greater than five percent of the total lawyers in each state are selected for the Super Lawyers lists, thirty-eight percent of Olshan’s lawyers have been selected for this honor in 2024.
Chair of Olshan’s Intellectual Property Law Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Mary Grieco and litigation counsel Katherine Mateo published an IPWatchdog article entitled “The Rise of IP Lawsuits When Posting Images: How to Navigate and Avoid Copyright Infringement Issues.” In the article, Mary and Kat discuss how the unlicensed use of another person’s photograph, even if that photograph is of yourself, comes with potentially robust legal ramifications.
Olshan’s Advertising, Marketing & Promotions Group was named a leading Tier 1 law firm by Media Law International. MLI’s 2024 ranking guide, covering firms and practitioners with media law experience across 60 jurisdictions globally, recognized Olshan for its excellence. Employing a multidisciplinary approach, Olshan integrates Brand Management & Protection and Advertising lawyers to offer knowledgeable, solutions-focused advice. View the rankings and editorial in MLI’s 2024 guide.
In the constantly changing and confusing world of consumer privacy laws, it is more important than ever for businesses to evaluate and reevaluate their collection and use of personal data. There is currently no comprehensive federal consumer privacy law, but as the first quarter of 2024 comes to a close, comprehensive state consumer privacy laws have gone into effect in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Virginia and Utah. Three more states – Texas, Oregon and Montana – have enacted privacy laws that go into effect in 2024, and six states – Delaware, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Tennessee and Indiana – have enacted privacy laws going into effect in 2025 and 2026. Seventeen additional states have active privacy law bills and are likely to pass their own privacy laws within the years to come. What this means is that consumer privacy laws are here to stay, and companies who conduct business in the United States cannot ignore their obligations under these laws. Any business that collects personal data from residents of these states may need to comply with these laws, regardless of where that business is located.
Next year will likely see recommendations and rules from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the U.S. Copyright Office in relation to artificial intelligence and its impact on intellectual property. Recognizing the lack of laws governing AI, on October 20, 2023, President Biden issued an Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (Order). The Order acknowledges AI’s “extraordinary potential for both promise and peril,” and parts of the Order deal specifically with intellectual property.
Privacy laws relating to the collection and use personal information continue to be a hot topic for 2024. While there is still no over-arching federal privacy law in the United States, several states have passed privacy laws that affect businesses that collect (whether online or off-line) and use personal information. California, Connecticut, Virginia, and Colorado already have privacy laws in effect. Utah’s privacy law goes into effect on December 31, 2023. Five more states’ privacy laws will become effective in 2024 – Washington (3/31/24), Oregon (7/1/24), Texas (7/1/24), Florida (7/1/24), and Montana (10/1/24). Additional state laws will become effective beyond 2024 – Delaware (1/1/25), Iowa (1/1/25), Tennessee (7/1/25), and Indiana (1/1/26). Beyond the laws that have been enacted, numerous state legislatures will be reviewing and debating proposed privacy legislation in 2024, namely: Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina, Maine, and Massachusetts.
Chair of Olshan’s Intellectual Property Law Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Mary Grieco and Olshan Co-Managing partner, Chair of the firm's Advertising, Marketing & Promotion's Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Andrew Lustigman published a Law360 (subscription required) article entitled “Open Issues At The USPTO And Beyond After Biden AI Order” In the article, they discuss how President Biden’s Executive Order relating to AI could potentially make it harder for businesses to protect AI-created inventions.
Chair of Olshan’s Intellectual Property Law Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Mary Grieco and Olshan Co-Managing partner, Chair of the firm's Advertising, Marketing & Promotion's Group and Co-Chair of the firm’s Brand Management & Protection Group Andrew Lustigman published a New York Law Journal (subscription required) guest column entitled “Will Biden’s AI Executive Order Give Clarity on the Issue of Inventorship?” concerning President Biden's AI Executive Order and how AI output will be categorized as intellectual property.
“If one of us is not free to celebrate ‘Taco Tuesday,’ then none of us are free to celebrate ‘Taco Tuesday.’”
In a somewhat whimsical, but still serious, trademark cancellation proceeding filed on May 16, 2023, Taco Bell is seeking to cancel the registration of the trademark TACO TUESDAY, which has been owned by Spicy Seasonings, LLC (dba Taco John’s) since 1989. Taco Bell is not seeking trademark protection of its own for the phrase. Rather, Taco Bell is arguing that no one should own the phrase, and everyone should be entitled to use it.
Taco Bell states that it is “not ...
Happy New Year! As we begin 2023, Olshan’s Advertising and Branding law groups share their list of hot topics that look to be on the horizon this year and should be of particular interest to you.
Starting in 2023, several new privacy laws go into effect in California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah. These laws apply not only to businesses based in those states but to any business that meets certain thresholds and collects, stores, or processes personal information from any residents in those states. Penalties for non-compliance with these laws can be steep.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused chaos throughout the world and heartbreaking death and suffering to the people of Ukraine. In today’s global economy, the war has also resulted in consequences and instability beyond what is seen on the daily news. With sanctions from most Western countries and Russia’s own actions internally, global brands may begin losing their valuable intellectual property rights in Russia.
Olshan's Brand Management & Protection Group is presenting an hour-long webinar on Wednesday, April 13, 2022 on Understanding U.S. Trademark Registrations.
Olshan Intellectual Property/Brand Management and Protection partner Mary Grieco was quoted in a recent Bloomberg Law article (subscription required) entitled, “Russian IP Animus Fuels Risk, Uncertainty as Firms Recalibrate.”
Happy holidays! We hope you are safe and healthy. As we enter the new year, Olshan’s Advertising and Branding law groups shares their list of hot topics that look to be on the horizon for 2022. If you have any questions on these or other issues, please reach out to us.
Olshan attorneys Andrew Lustigman, Mary Grieco and Morgan Spina will present a webinar entitled “The Legal Side of the Digital Marketing World” hosted by the Social Media Association.
Olshan Intellectual Property/Brand Management and Protection partner Mary Grieco was quoted in a recent Law360 article (subscription required) entitled “Apple’s App Tracking Shift Seizes On ‘Spirit’ Of Privacy Laws.”
Olshan Intellectual Property/Brand Management and Protection partner Mary Grieco was featured on IP Talk, the news blog of Inlex IP Expertise, a French industrial property law firm focusing on trademarks, domain names and data protection.
Following the lead of California, Virginia is set to become the second U.S. state to enact comprehensive consumer privacy legislation. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is expected to sign the Consumer Data Protection Act (“CDPA”) into law, which will go into effect on January 1, 2023. As it may take businesses some time to make sure they are in compliance by the January 1, 2023 effective date, it is recommended that businesses review their current privacy practices and make any necessary changes.
In this age of online advertising, independent reviews by customers have become a crucial marketing tool for many businesses. Having “5-star” customer reviews is worn like a badge of honor, and companies can boast of their high customer ratings in an effort to attract other customers who look to such reviews for confirmation of the reputation of a company or the high quality of its goods or services. Given the value of such reviews, customer reviews have become subject to falsification and manipulation by companies seeking to boost their ratings and attract other customers. Such actions, however, can result in liability for false advertising, and two recent cases highlight the serious liability a company that falsifies and manipulates reviews can suffer.
Olshan Advertising attorneys Andrew Lustigman, Scott Shaffer, Mary Grieco and Morgan Spina presented a webinar for the Consumer Protection Monthly Update hosted by the American Bar Association Antitrust Law Section.
Olshan Advertising partners Andrew Lustigman and Scott Shaffer, along with Olshan Intellectual Property partner Mary Grieco—all of whom are members of Olshan’s Brand Management & Protection Practice Group—will present a webinar entitled “Marketing in the COVID-19 Era” for the Bronx Third Avenue Business Improvement District on December 16 at 9am. Areas to be covered include ecommerce marketing, advertising claims, social media marketing, and data privacy, followed by a Q&A.
Our fast-moving webinar discussed key issues involving marketing and business practices in the current environment.
While much attention has been focused on the new sweeping California privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), other laws governing the handling and protection of personal data by businesses have been passed without nearly as much fanfare. One such law is the New York Stop Hacks and Improve Electronic Security Data Act, also known as the SHIELD Act. Although not nearly as broad as the CCPA, the SHIELD Act may affect any person or business that collects, uses, and/or stores “private information” from a New York resident. Under the SHIELD Act, any such person or business must implement adequate security measures, set forth in the Act, to protect “private information” of New York residents. The Act also outlines the steps that must be taken by a business to notify affected individuals of any security breach in which “private information” was or is reasonably believed to have been compromised.
Advertising, Marketing & Promotions practice chair Andrew Lustigman, Intellectual Property/Privacy partner Mary Grieco, AMP partner Scott Shaffer, and associate Morgan Spina authored four Guidance Notes on direct marketing in California recently published in the prestigious OneTrust DataGuidance (subscription required). The first, entitled “California – Emarketing,” covers both the state and federal legislation, as well as regulatory guidance from the Federal Trade Commission, concerning emarketing. In the second, “California – Telemarketing,” the authors examine the numerous pieces of state and federal legislation governing telemarketing, including the “Automatic Dialing Law” and the “Unwanted Calls Law.” The third, entitled “California – SMS/MMS Marketing,” discusses various state and federal laws on SMS/MMS, including the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and the consent requirements that advertisers must follow when using these services. In the fourth, “California – Postal Marketing,” the authors explore various state and federal laws on postal marketing, such as California’s “Mail Solicitation Law” and the federal “Deceptive Mail Act.”
Advertising, Marketing & Promotions partner Andrew Lustigman, Intellectual Property partner Mary Grieco and associate Morgan Spina authored a chapter entitled, “USA – Cookies & Similar Technologies” in a recent publication included in the prestigious OneTrust DataGuidance (subscription required). The chapter covers the current laws and information regarding the use of cookies and third parties on the Internet.
Vermont, which already has one of the most unique automatic renewal laws on the books, has further increased the compliance obligations for sellers utilizing continuity arrangements. On March 5, 2020, Governor Phil Scott signed Vermont Senate Bill 110 into effect. This new law primarily tackles issues surrounding privacy, but also updates Vermont’s automatic renewal provisions to bring cancellation of consumer contracts in line with California’s online requirements. The law goes into effect on July 1, 2020.
Almost all intellectual property offices throughout the world have used an online filing system for some time, which allows IP owners and attorneys the ability to file the required prosecution and maintenance documents online. In addition, many government intellectual property offices, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) have been set up to allow employees to work remotely. Therefore, while the physical offices of intellectual property government agencies are likely closed or are operating with minimal on-site staff, we do not foresee any major disruptions.
As many businesses may be aware by now, California recently enacted sweeping new laws governing the collection, use and management of personal information. The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) that went into effect on January 1, 2020 has many businesses struggling to understand the application of the law and exactly what a business needs to do to comply. In an effort to clarify some aspects of the law, California issued draft regulations in October 2019 that provided some guidance to businesses, and those draft regulations continue to be revised as late as March 11, 2020. While still not finalized, the revised CCPA draft regulations offer some clarification, and open up more questions, on certain issues.
In today’s global marketplace, it is more important than ever for a brand owner to be aware of international considerations while building and marketing the brand in the United States. There are many similarities in the laws across the various jurisdictions in the world, although there are also significant differences, and a brand owner can run into serious or unintended consequences when expanding the brand into other countries. Brand owners should not assume that activities permitted or appropriate in the United States are also permitted and appropriate elsewhere. Many of these issues were discussed recently in Moscow at a conference of international intellectual property lawyers at which I presented, as the United States representative, on a panel entitled “Brand Protection Strategy in the United States and Russia.” The conference was a commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the Russian law firm Gorrodissky & Partners.
California’s onerous privacy regulations will soon be in effect. Unless exempted, businesses that collect personal data from residents of California need to make sure they are in compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act, California Civil Code §§1798.100-1798.199 (“CCPA”) by January 1, 2020. If you have not yet done so, we urge you to take appropriate steps now to avoid potential liability for failure to comply with this new law.
In today’s global marketplace, it is more important than ever to make sure your brand is protected around the world. Failing to do so could prevent you from entering a key marketplace, or even worse, could allow an unscrupulous individual to create a business in another country that directly mimics your business. One of the first steps in protecting your brand is obtaining trademark protection in countries in which you do business or intend to do business. Unfortunately, this can be an expensive endeavor for brand owners as trademark protection is territorial and, with very few exceptions, must be handled on a country-by-country basis. Each country will have its own governmental filing fees, and the filings will generally need to be handled by an attorney who is licensed to practice in that country.
Intellectual Property partner Mary Grieco was quoted in a recent Law360 article (subscription required) on the prevalence of recent federal and state laws, like California’s Consumer Privacy Act and a U.S. Senate proposal to create a national “Do Not Track” registry, designed to increase the public’s control over the use and sale of its personal information.
The United Kingdom voted to withdraw from the European Union; since a member state of the EU has never withdrawn from the EU before, the implications and how this will affect intellectual property rights in the UK, is uncertain.
Bloomberg BNA Electronic Commerce & Law Report published “Social Media Considerations for Real Estate Companies” authored by Olshan Partners Andrew Lustigman and Mary Grieco.
Trademark Owners Should Act to Register Their Trademarks with the Trademark Clearinghouse.
A movie-still from the final scene of Casablanca us at the heart of recently-filed lawsuits in New York and Los Angeles between Burberry and the heirs of Humphrey Bogart.
If I pay for something, I own it, right? With most everything in the world, that is true, and it seems logical. When it comes to copyrights, however, the law and logic do not always agree.
Also by Nina Krauthamer*
Applications for new .NGO and .ONG domain extensions, reserved exclusively for charities, non-profits and NGOs, may be available as early as January 2013.
A trademark is often a company's most valuable asset. It is what distinguishes a company's products or services from that of its competitors, and many times, consumers will make their purchasing decisions based on the goodwill of a particular brand. For that reason, it is not unusual for a company to have a knee-jerk reaction to challenge another company's use or ownership of the identical mark.
In 2010, General Motors used an image of Albert Einstein in an ad for its Terrain vehicle. The image, which GM licensed from Getty Images, depicted Einstein's head on a muscular, shirtless body with an "e=mc2" tattoo.
A judge in New York recently refused to dismiss the complaint filed by a model, Hailey Clauson, and her parents, brought against the retailer Urban Outfitters, claiming the unauthorized use of Clauson's photograph.
Social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook are gaining in popularity with companies and individuals using these valuable tools as a quick and cost-effective way of promotion and advertising.
The new social media website known as Pinterest has exploded in popularity in recent months.
What happens when an employee amasses numerous "followers" on Twitter and then leaves the company and begins "tweeting" for a competitor?
Beginning September 7, 2011, a new ".xxx" domain name extension is set to be
launched.