Case Overview

In this case, the Intellectual Property Team of One Law Partners, LLC (headed by Attorney Kristen Hwang) represented the user of the mark, Korean Broadcasting System (KBS), in filing a negative scope of rights confirmation action.

The team argued that no particular broadcaster should be permitted to monopolize the use of the term “Choice” in connection with election broadcasting.

In support of this position, the firm presented evidence demonstrating that numerous broadcasters had used the term “Choice” in election-related programming and contended that the mark lacked, or at least possessed only weak, distinctiveness in that context.

The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board accepted these arguments and concluded that the registered service mark “Choice” and the mark used by KBS, “Choice 300,” were not similar and were therefore unlikely to cause confusion as to source.

Accordingly, the Board confirmed that KBS had not infringed the registered service mark owned by another party.

Significance of the Case

• Provides guidance regarding whether descriptive or generic expressions may be monopolized by a particular business entity.

• Clarifies the boundary between freedom of expression in election broadcasting titles and trademark protection.

• Reaffirms the limited scope of service mark rights in technical, descriptive, or weakly distinctive marks within the broadcasting and media industries.
   

Attorney Kristen Hwang | ejhwang@onelawpartners.com

Public Relations Team, One Law Partners, LLC | pr@onelawpartners.com