A Real Lesson In The Result of a Battle Between Unregistered Trademarks – Having to Disgorge Your Profits

The merits of a spiced autumn harvest wine weren’t up for
debate in a recent Wisconsin case,  C&N Corp. d/b/a Door County Winery v. Illinois
River Winery
.  Just the issue of which
one of these Illinois/Wisconsin wineries had the better claim to sell theirs by
the name Hallowine and whether priority rights in an unregistered trademark
could force a competing winery to disgorge its profits… yes, it can.

After Illinois
River Winery
filed an application to the USPTO to trademark the word
Hallowine.  When Door County Winery learned of the
application, they filed an opposition that ultimately resulted in this decision
from the trademark office finding in favor of Door County.  The problem was that both companies made
something called Hallowine.  Their
respective labels and bottles were:

The PTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board issued this opinion
sustaining Door County’s opposition to Illinois River’s
application to register
the Hallowine mark and also found that Door County had priority in an
unregistered Hallowine word mark and that there was a likelihood of confusion
between the two wineries’ use of the Hallowine Mark.  That opinion was issued on October 21, 2008,
and for some reason, Illinois River apparently didn’t stop using the mark and
Door County sued to stop it.  Door County
brought a motion arguing that the TTAB had already determined that Door County
had priority and that the only issue left was what the damages against Illinois
River would amount to – they amounted to quite a bit, the total revenue from Illinois
River’s infringing sales during the known infringing period – the October 21,
2008 date of the decision through December 2012 – $508,864.26.

Now, under the Lanham Act the measure of damages could have
been reduced if Illinois River would have put forth evidence that of the
$508,864.26, some was the cost of production which could have been deducted
from the revenue… but it didn’t, so it has to disgorge the whole revenue
stream.  You can read the whole court opinion here.

The little lesson here is to scrutinize the entire marketplace when you
think you’ve got a new name or a new mark, not just the trademarks on file with
the USPTO.

Ashley Brandt

Hi there! I’m happy you’re here. My name is Ashley Brandt and I’m an attorney in Chicago representing clients in the Food and Beverage, Advertising, Media, and Real Estate industries. A while back I kept getting calls and questions from industry professionals and attorneys looking for advice and information on a fun and unique area of law that I’m lucky enough to practice in. These calls represented a serious lack of, and need for, some answers, news, and information on the legal aspects of marketing and media. I've got this deep seeded belief that information should be readily available and that the greatest benefit from the information age is open access to knowledge... so ... this blog seemed like the best way to accomplish that. I enjoy being an attorney and it’s given me some amazing opportunities, wonderful experiences, and an appreciation and love for this work. I live in Chicago and work at an exceptional law firm, Goldstein & McClintock, with some truly brilliant people. Feel free to contact me at any time with any issues, comments, concerns… frankly, after reading this far, I hope you take the time to at least let me know what you think about the blog and how I can make it a better resource.

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: