Top Cannabis Investment News, Member Posts, Cannabis Investment Daily Indices and more!

2yrs ago Cannabis harrisbricken Views: 292

Two companies that provide data to the hemp industry are embroiled in a trademark dispute. New Leaf Data Services (“New Leaf”) sued PanXchange in Connecticut federal court, alleging that PanXchange’s offer of services under marks such as PANXCHANGE® HEMP BENCHMARKS constitutes infringement of New Leaf’s supplemental trademark registration, HEMP BENCHMARKS (Reg. No. 5079914). The case was eventually been transferred to Colorado.

In its answer to New Leaf’s complaint, PanXchange stated that the HEMP BENCHMARKS trademark is generic. PanXchange noted that Merriam-Webster defines “benchmarks” as “something that serves as a standard by which others may be measured or judged.” As a result, PanXchange claims, “the phrase ‘hemp benchmarks’ is not capable of distinguishing New Leaf’s services.” Consequently, PanXchange is asking the court to cancel’s New Leaf’s registration.

The use of the term “capable” is important, as a supplemental registration only requires that a trademark be capable of distinguishing an applicant’s goods or services. It does not require that the trademark actually distinguish said goods or services.

At heart, this case is about trademark basics, with the hemp connection being largely incidental. Nonetheless, the holding could have implications for other companies in the hemp and cannabis space.

If the court agrees with PanXchange and finds that “hemp benchmarks” is a generic phrase, it could lead companies to push the envelope when it comes to marks following the same basic formula (such as CANNABIS BENCHMARKS, for which New Leaf also has a supplemental registration). By contrast, if the court upholds New Leaf’s claim, we could see an uptick in applications for such marks.

What do you think? Should “hemp benchmarks” be considered a generic term like “oranges” or “computers?” Give us your thoughts in the comments section. And if you are a new or growing cannabis business, give some serious thought to your branding. Aside from federal law issues, a generic or descriptive name will always be hard to protect and may create headaches for your cannabis business.

 

Hemp Trademarks and the Perils of Generic Terms: PanXchange v. New Leaf Data Services on Harris Bricken.


Today's Cannabis Investment Headlines:

Log In for More
Access Over 250K+ Industry Headlines, Posts and Updates
Not a member yet?

Join AlphaMaven

The Premier Alternative Investment
Research and Due Diligence Platform for Investors

Free Membership for Qualified Investors and Industry Participants
  • Easily Customize Content to Match Your Investment Preferences
  • Breaking News 24/7/365
  • Daily Newsletter & Indices
  • Alternative Investment Listings & LeaderBoards
  • Industry Research, Due Diligence, Videos, Webinars, Events, Press Releases, Market Commentary, Newsletters, Fact Sheets, Presentations, Investment Mandates, Video PitchBooks & More!
  • Company Directory
  • Contact Directory
  • Member Posts & Publications
  • Alpha University Video Series to Expand Investor Knowledge
  • AUM Accelerator Program (designed for investment managers)
  • Over 450K+ Industry Headlines, Posts and Updates
ALL ALPHAMAVEN CONTENT IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTENT POSTED BY MEMBERS DOES NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OPINION OR BELIEFS OF ALPHAMAVEN AND HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED BY ALPHAMAVEN. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION FOR INVESTMENT. THE MATERIAL PROVIDED HEREIN IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO SELL OR A SOLICITATION OF AN OFFER TO BUY ANY INTERESTS OF ANY FUND OR ANY OTHER SECURITIES. ANY SUCH OFFERINGS CAN BE MADE ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE INVESTMENT'S PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM. PRIOR TO INVESTING, INVESTORS ARE STRONGLY URGED TO REVIEW CAREFULLY THE PRIVATE PLACEMENT MEMORANDUM (INCLUDING THE RISK FACTORS DESCRIBED THEREIN), THE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND THE SUBSCRIPTION DOCUMENTS, TO ASK SUCH QUESTIONS OF THE INVESTMENT MANAGER AS THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE, AND TO DISCUSS ANY PROSPECTIVE INVESTMENT IN THE FUND WITH THEIR LEGAL AND TAX ADVISERS IN ORDER TO MAKE AN INDEPENDENT DETERMINATION OF THE SUITABILITY AND CONSEQUENCES OF AN INVESTMENT.