Jackson Walker partner Chris Rourk spoke with Asia IP, a leading international IP news journal, about Utah fantasy theme park Evermore’s lawsuit against Taylor Swift alleging trademark infringement over her album of the same name and related merchandise.
In the article, Chris notes:
“They are asserting four trademark registrations. Of those, at least one looks like it could possibly have some merit, namely, Registration Number 5,597,168, which includes ‘entertainment services in the nature of live visual and audio performances by an actor’ in the description of goods and services. Evermore Park will have to present evidence of actual confusion, which is alleged in the complaint to include:
- inquiries from guests at Evermore Park regarding the Evermore Album,
- substantial fluctuations in Evermore’s web traffic on the day the Evermore Album was released, and
- explicit associations by social media users between Taylor Swift and Evermore.
However, what is unclear is whether this evidence shows actual confusion regarding the source of any ‘entertainment services in the nature of live visual and audio performances by an actor.’ By its own description of the goods and services that are covered by the mark, Evermore Park may have excluded any claim for damages based on sales of recorded music, although Evermore Park could argue that recorded music falls within the zone of natural expansion of the goods and services for the registered mark.”
In contrast, Evermore Park is also asserting Registration Number 5,329,899, for ‘providing Halloween themed park services.’ The facts alleged in the complaint do not seem to support a claim that Taylor Swift used the mark Evermore for providing Halloween-themed park services.”
To read more, see the Asia IP article “Taylor Swift sued by theme park over trademark infringement.” For questions related to trademark infringement, please contact Chris at email@example.com.
Christopher J. Rourk is a Dallas intellectual property attorney with extensive experience handling high-profile matters for clients, both those dealing with all aspects of intellectual property as well as corporate transactions, commercial litigation and other complex interdisciplinary matters. He has prosecuted over 400 patents to issuance in diverse technological fields such as nanotechnology devices, semiconductor systems and devices, radio frequency systems and devices, analog systems and devices, telecommunications systems and devices, medical devices, image data processing systems and devices, and consumer electronics. His unique combination of ten years of work experience as an engineer and diverse legal experience has given him insight into solutions for many business problems encountered by clients, as well as preventative measures and strategies for avoiding those problems.