Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Panicware Inc.’s Pop-Up Stopper software blocks Internet ads from popping up, but Panicware’s chief executive, Matina Fresenius, couldn’t block the company’s trademarked name from doing the same. Seattle-based Panicware is a startup with a minuscule budget and Fresenius didn’t want to pay a lawyer for a simple task. She registered Pop-Up Stopper at the Patent and Trademark Office’s Web site on her own, but to little effect. After the mark was registered, “everyone and his dog started calling their product ‘pop-up stoppers,’” she says. Fresenius had unwittingly registered the name in the patent office’s Supplemental Register instead of its Principal Register. Although marks in both registers are entitled to use the � symbol, those registered supplementally receive less protection. Principal marks, for example, cannot be contested after five years, and custom agents can even block the importation of goods that infringe principal marks. There is a four-level hierarchy of trademarks — generic, descriptive, suggestive, and arbitrary. Only the top two levels are automatically entered on the Principal Register. When Fresenius registered Pop-Up Stopper, the patent office classified the mark as descriptive and placed it on the Supplemental Register. “I had no idea about the technical side of trademark registration,” she says. The panicked executive called in the Seattle office of Darby & Darby. Partner David Telleksen successfuly had the mark moved to the Principal Register, and Panicware recently received a notice of allowance, which means that the full trademark registration will issue shortly. Telleksen also represents Panicware in copyright matters. In early February he won a default judgment for Panicware in an infringement case against a Toronto company. Mobile Software Technologies Inc. was selling a program that, he says, was “an exact duplicate” of Pop-Up Stopper. A federal judge in Seattle issued an injunction on sales and awarded Panicware $150,000 and attorney fees. The first year of Darby & Darby’s legal fees ate up approximately a third of Panicware’s budget. But Fresenius says she considers it money well spent. In fact, she’s so pleased with Darby & Darby’s work that after the copyright ruling, she issued a press release aimed at other startup companies: “We said it’s important to protect your IP, even if you are a small company.”

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.