Issue No. 062
October 7, 2026
New York
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IP Briefing · by ESCA Legal
|
|
|
|
| TradeSun sued OpenAI over the Astra name used for GPT-6, alleging that the larger company's launch threatens to overwhelm the identity of its earlier enterprise AI brand. TradeSun says it has used ASTRA since 2021 and registered the mark in 2022. Its October 5 complaint in Northern California federal court alleges overlapping services, including document processing, data extraction, and risk screening. OpenAI disputes the allegations. No infringement ruling has been issued. |
| § | The complaint names OpenAI OpCo, LLC and OpenAI Group PBC. TradeSun's registration covers software-as-a-service using AI for document classification and data extraction. | | § | TradeSun alleges reverse confusion: customers may assume the earlier ASTRA business is affiliated with, or copying, the larger later user. | | § | TradeSun seeks an injunction, damages, and profits attributable to the alleged infringement. The complaint does not establish that confusion or infringement occurred. |
|
| Continue reading → |
| § ESCA Takeaway |
| Reverse confusion asks whether a larger, later entrant can make an earlier brand look like the newcomer. TradeSun's Astra complaint puts that question alongside allegations of overlapping enterprise AI services. A registration and an allegation of confusion are evidence and claims to be examined, not an infringement judgment. OpenAI disputes the allegations, and the court has not decided the merits. |
|
|
| More IP Stories |
|
| § Copyright · Filed |
|
|
| Laffapalooza sued Apple, Tubi, distributor Urban Home Entertainment, and producer Marcus Joseph King over allegedly unauthorized streaming of its comedy films, including Jamie Foxx Presents Laffapalooza. The October 2 Georgia federal complaint alleges that King licensed the works to the distributor without authority and that the films then appeared on streaming platforms. Laffapalooza also asks the court to resolve its ownership dispute with King. The claims have not been decided. |
| § | The complaint names Apple and Tubi as defendants, alongside King, Urban Home Entertainment, and unnamed defendants. | | § | Laffapalooza alleges that a 2023 licensing arrangement did not authorize the distributor or platforms to exploit the works. | | § | The company seeks damages, profits, an injunction, and a declaration of ownership. Its allegations are not infringement findings. |
|
|
Why it matters
The suit separates two links in a content deal: who owns the films and who had authority to license them. Laffapalooza disputes both the licensing chain and the resulting streams.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Trademark · Filed |
|
|
| Pepperdine filed its Ninth Circuit opening brief in the trademark dispute over Netflix's Running Point, whose fictional basketball team uses the Waves name. The university argues that the show's team identity and promotional uses of Waves function as branding, not just elements of an expressive work. The October 2 brief challenges the district court's dismissal of claims against Netflix, Warner Bros., and Kaling International. It is Pepperdine's appellate argument, not a new ruling. |
| § | Pepperdine points to the Waves name, logos, team colors, jerseys, and promotional materials as support for its confusion claims. | | § | The university argues that trademark uses identifying source fall outside the heightened protection for expressive works described in Rogers, relying on the Supreme Court's Jack Daniel's decision. | | § | The district court entered final judgment April 15, and Pepperdine appealed May 11. This development is the opening brief, not the initial filing of the appeal. |
|
|
Why it matters
Pepperdine asks the appeals court to distinguish a fictional team's appearance inside a show from the use of that identity in marketing. The brief seeks reversal; it does not establish that the show's Waves branding infringes.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Trademark · Filed |
|
|
| Amazon and Crocs filed a joint federal complaint accusing Mayer D. Cohen, Doofter LLC, and Barbados Leather of selling counterfeit Crocs Classic Clogs through Amazon seller accounts. The October 2 Washington complaint cites test purchases and alleged differences in labels and hangtags. Amazon says it blocked the accounts and refunded customers. The lawsuit seeks trademark relief and damages, but the counterfeit allegations have not been adjudicated. |
| § | The complaint identifies the seller accounts Serial-Recorded and TaperPowell and alleges sales during 2025. | | § | Crocs brings trademark counterfeiting and infringement claims. The plaintiffs also allege false designation of origin and Washington consumer-protection violations. | | § | Amazon.com Services separately alleges breach of its seller agreement. The complaint names individual and corporate defendants, plus Does 1-10. |
|
|
Why it matters
The suit joins the brand's trademark claims with the marketplace's claims against its sellers. Test-purchase allegations and account enforcement provide the asserted basis for the complaint, not a judicial finding that the products were counterfeit.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
| § Copyright · Announced |
|
|
| Thomas Rhett and HYBE America's Blue Highway Records announced Fifty-One/Forty-Nine Records, an artist-led label that will serve as the home for his recorded music. Rhett said the partnership gives him the opportunity to own his body of work while retaining support for future recordings. The announcement did not disclose financial terms, the label's ownership structure, or whether the arrangement includes his earlier catalog. |
| § | The partnership was announced October 6 and builds on Rhett's relationship with the company formerly known as Big Machine Label Group. | | § | Fifty-One/Forty-Nine already appears in the copyright line of his 2024 album About a Woman, released under an exclusive license to The Valory Music Co. | | § | His 2022 album Where We Started carries a Big Machine Label Group copyright line. The new announcement does not identify which older recordings are covered. |
|
|
Why it matters
The announcement separates the public promise of artist ownership from the still-undisclosed scope of the deal. A label partnership, a copyright credit, and ownership of an entire catalog are not interchangeable. The published details identify a new home for Rhett's recordings without establishing that every earlier master has changed hands.
|
| Continue reading → |
|
QUICK HITS
| § Trademark | Workers United's trademark and copyright case against Starbucks can proceed after an October 2 court decision denying Starbucks' jurisdictional dismissal motion. The union seeks declarations concerning its name and cup-and-fist logo; the court did not decide whether those uses infringe. [source] | | § Trademark | LUXBNB operator The Sovereign Kingdom sued Airbnb for declarations that its name does not infringe and challenged the protectability of BNB. The October 5 complaint presents genericness and descriptiveness arguments, not a court holding that Airbnb's trademark rights are invalid. [source] | | § Trademark | Burger King requested a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against former franchisees allegedly operating as Jumbo King Burger while continuing to use Burger King identifiers. The October 2 filing is a request for relief, not an order granting an injunction. [source] | | § Copyright | Ted Entertainment and Matt Fisher survived ByteDance's motion to dismiss their DMCA anti-circumvention claim concerning AI-video training. The October 2 order finds the allegations sufficient to proceed, not that ByteDance actually scraped the videos or is liable. [source] | | § Copyright | An October 2 order dismissed Austin Beaulier's NoAI-tag copyright-management-information claims against Roblox with 30 days to amend. The court accepted the tag as adequately pleaded CMI but found the removal, intent, and distribution allegations insufficient. This is not a final merits exoneration. [source] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not subscribed? Sign up for future editions of Marked by ESCA Legal.
|
|
|
|
This newsletter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Published by ESCA Legal. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Attorney advertising; prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
|