Branding and the Metaverse
Use of trademarks in the metaverse can be an untapped resource to garner profit and expand the universe of consumers; however, the new format carries risks and opportunities for unauthorized third parties to try to profit off well-known names or diminish the value of a brand.
March 25, 2022 at 02:00 PM
9 minute read
The rise of the "metaverse" raises new issues for brand owners in the procurement, protection, and enforcement of valuable trademark rights. Branding via its virtual worlds and economies, where digital assets are experienced, sold, and traded and users can interact with a computer generated environment, requires a shift in thinking about traditional trademark concepts applied to tangible goods and services to establishing a presence within evolving digital media ripe for licensing and name recognition. Use of trademarks in the metaverse can be an untapped resource to garner profit and expand the universe of consumers; however, the new format carries risks and opportunities for unauthorized third parties to try to profit off well-known names or diminish the value of a brand.
All entities would be prudent to be part of the evolution of the metaverse by broadening trademark policing strategies, strategizing a virtual presence, and seeking protection of the virtual use of their trademarks.
|Why Are Trademark Rights Important?
Trademarks are fundamental to the value of a brand. As a foundation, trademark protection offers opportunities to generate more income through licensing and good will, and enhances brand image and reputation. In the metaverse, trademarks may designate a wide range of virtual products such as virtual clothing, accessories, food, cosmetics, sporting goods, and many products we encounter in our tangible lives. Also, trademarks can be associated with the design of customized versions of avatars, products, or unique artwork. Other uses may involve services such as online marketplaces for the provision of goods, virtual cafes, art galleries, concert halls, event spaces, and sporting events, and many more.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNot All Secrets Are Trade Secrets: SDNY Examines the Limits of NDA Protection
13 minute read'Rampant Piracy': US Record Labels File Copyright Suit Against French Distributor Believe
5 minute readDow Jones, New York Post Sue Perplexity AI Over Alleged Misuse of Copyrighted Works
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1LexisNexis Responds to Canadian Professor’s Criticism of Lexis+ AI
- 2'Everything Leaves a Digital Footprint': How to Navigate the Complexities of Internal Investigations
- 3Baker McKenzie Accepts Defeat on Australian Integration With Firm's Asia Practice
- 4PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
- 5The Dynamic Duo Behind CMG's Legal Ops Team
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250