No summary, proceed to other tabs.

Click the topic headings to navigate through the cases and quotes concerning that topic.
Expand All | Contract All

  • Call letters are registerable marks.
    • In re Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of Dallas, Serial No. 75/689,077, (TTAB 2001).
      • It is clear from the record, as well as applicant's and the Examining Attorney's arguments, that both applicant's and registrant's marks are call letters. The Board determined in 1985 that radio call letters were registrable in the case of In re WSM, Inc., 225 USPQ 883, 884 (TTAB 1985).
  • Call letter marks are considered service marks.
    • In re Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of Dallas, Serial No. 75/689,077, (TTAB 2001).
      • In the time since the FCC changed its rules, there have been a number of decisions involving likelihood of confusion between broadcasting call letters. See, e.g.: Infinity Broadcasting Corp. v. Greater Boston Radio II, Inc., supra; Pride Communications v. WCKG Inc., 851 F.Supp. 895, 30 USPQ2d 1185 (N.D. Ill. 1994); Virginia Tech Foundation, Inc. v. Family Group, Limited V, 666 F.Supp. 856, 2 USPQ2d 1961 (W.D. Va. 1987); Pathfinder Communications Corp. v. Midwest Communications Co., 593 F.Supp. 281, 224 USPQ 203 (N.D. Ind. 1984); USA Network v. Gannett Co., 584 F.Supp. 195, 223 USPQ 678 (D. Colo. 1984); and Draper Communications, Inc. v. Delaware Valley Broadcasters Ltd. Partnership, 229 USPQ 161 (Del. Ch. 1985). These courts, in determining likelihood of confusion issues, have treated call letters in the same way as any other service mark. See: 1 J. T. McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, §7:12 (4th ed. 2001).
In re Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of Dallas, Serial No. 75/689,077, (TTAB 2001) Grand Total
Infinity Broadcasting Corp. v. Great Boston Radio, II Inc., 32 USPQ2d 1925 (D.C. Mass. 1994) 1
Virginia Tech Foundation Inc. v. Family Group, Limited V, 666 F.Supp. 856, 2 USPQ2d 1961 (W.D. Va. 1987) 1
Draper Communications Inc. v. Delaware Valley Broadcasters Ltd. Partnership, 229 USPQ 161 (Del. Ch. 1985) 1
In re WSM Inc., 225 USPQ 883 (TTAB 1985) 1
Pathfinder Communications Corp. v. Midwest Communications Co., 593 F.Supp. 281, 224 USPQ 203 (N.D. Ind. 1984) 1
USA Network v. Gannett Co., 584 F.Supp. 195, 223 USPQ 678 (D. Colo. 1984) 1
Grand Total 6 6
No Statutes Listed.