Impossible food sues to cancel earlier trademark owners

Re:Impossible food sues to cancel earlier trademark owners by jawns on Wednesday November 17, 2021 @02:04PM (#29257393)

And isn't the company that holds the trademark legally obligated to defend it? My understanding is that if you aren't actively making sure that your trademark is not infringed upon, it bolsters the case that the trademark has been abandoned.

So it's not like the trademark holder is looking for a fight. The law essentially forces their hand.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Impossible food sues to cancel earlier trademark owners by Brendinooo on Wednesday November 17, 2021 @02:25PM (#29257694)

Companies can have the same name if they're in different industries. Seems like Impossible X/HQ or whatever was contending overlap on the nutrition/food side.

I'm not a lawyer and I'm not reading this closely as I'd need to in order to be more authoritative, but it seems like most of their trademarks are for non-food-related sectors. "Pharmaceutical Products" is the only one that looks close to "food" in the trademarks I'm seeing on their page. Not sure how you get from that to "recipes, food ingredients, and cooking information", but would love to hear from someone who would know!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Impossible food sues to cancel earlier trademark owners by jeremyjh on Wednesday November 17, 2021 @03:21PM (#29258356)

And yet that is not the story we were told in the SP. We were told a lie.

[ Parent | on HN ]