Category

News

Intellectual Property and Branding Traditions

The Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade® is not just a holiday tradition—it’s a celebration of how intellectual property powers large-scale events. At the center is the federally registered trademark MACY’S THANKSGIVING DAY PARADE®, which protects the parade’s name, prevents misuse, and reinforces Macy’s brand identity.

The parade also brings together a variety of copyrightable works, from musical performances and choreography to sculptural balloon designs. Broadcast rights further layer the IP landscape, giving networks exclusive control over recording and airing the event.

Perhaps the most visible IP elements are the licensed character balloons—from the Pillsbury® Doughboy® to Mario®. These appear through carefully negotiated licensing agreements that allow Macy’s to feature beloved characters while giving IP owners valuable national visibility.

All together, the parade functions as a living example of how trademarks, copyrights, and licensing work in harmony—proving that intellectual property is as essential to the production as the balloons themselves.

Overview of Paris Convention Priority and the Madrid System

Building or expanding a brand internationally requires navigating varying trademark rules, timelines, and filing options. Two key tools—the Paris Convention priority system and the Madrid System—allow applicants to streamline protection across multiple markets.

The Paris Convention lets applicants claim the filing date of their first national application when filing abroad within six months, supporting coordinated global launches. Applicants may file multiple national basics and later select the strongest as the foundation for a Madrid filing.

The Madrid System provides a centralized way to seek protection in many jurisdictions through one application administered by WIPO. Although local counsel may be needed to address refusals, international registrations last ten years and renew directly through WIPO. A Madrid application must be tied to a national basic mark, and each designated country conducts its own examination. If no refusal issues within 12–18 months, protection is granted automatically.

Use of Madrid requires a qualifying connection to a member country, and the international application cannot exceed the scope of the basic mark. Common irregularities involve classification, fees, and data inconsistencies, and WIPO deadlines are strict. For the first five years, the international registration depends on the basic mark and is vulnerable to central attack; transformation can preserve rights if the basic mark is limited or canceled.

While the Madrid System offers broad reach and centralized management, it requires a stable basic mark and rigorous deadline tracking. Best practices include using vetted identifications, monitoring refusals and ownership changes, planning transfers early, and tracking use requirements.

McCoy Russell LLP guides clients through global trademark strategy, managing filings and enforcement in over 130 countries and maintaining an active conflicts practice with more than 250 opposition and cancellation matters worldwide. Please contact us if we can help.

Computer Mouse Innovations In Form and Function

Submitted by Tori Puoci

As a French horn player and someone who spends a significant amount of time on the computer, I was delighted to see a familiar aesthetic applied to an often forgettable tool. And of course, being in the field of Intellectual Property, I wondered what functional innovations might accompany or be demanded by this new design. How does the Mouse MI design, presented by Yamaha, change the traditional computer mouse design, and how does that design change affect its function?

Mouse MI (2022)

The “Yamaha” brand is shared by the Yamaha Corporation, which focuses on musical instruments, and Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd., which produces motorcycles and other recreational vehicles. Mouse MI was designed as a collaboration between Yamaha and Yamaha Motor that aimed to give a sense of the design style of the Yamaha brand. The collaboration also spawned Mouse MC, which has a frame structure like a motorcycle.

Aside from drawing obvious visual inspiration from wind instruments, Mouse MI further includes piston-like valves that provide tactile sensation of a click. Physical dial knobs can be used for adjusting operations such as “mouse pointer speed, number of scrolls, click intervals, and other functions originally sent through the OS of the PC”. The shape of Mouse MI merges instrumental and electronic designs as well, and was “created as a result of trying to express the flow of electrons on a printed circuit board in a way that can be felt visually”. Read more about the Mouse MI and Mouse MC here: https://www.yamaha.com/en/tech-design/design/research/mouse-design/

Unfortunately, these are only conceptual designs but are nonetheless great examples of how both form and function can be motivation for need-based innovation.

The first publication of a computer mouse that I was able to find was filed by Stanford Research Institute in 1967 for “X-y position indicator for a display system” (US3541541A).

This design is fairly similar to most computer mice we see today: a somewhat oval shaped device on top of which a user positions their hand to move the device over a surface and move a corresponding cursor on a display. The X-y position indicator also includes multiple buttons for making selections or changes on the display.

US3541541A

The purpose of the computer mouse has remained the same since 1967. In that time, the computer mouse has transformed from a highly technical appliance to a tool used by millions of people for hours on end every day. Recent developments in computer mouse technology may be more focused on design than function, such as to create more ergonomic or aesthetic options. While form frequently dictates function, and function often dictates form, patent law recognizes that the two can be separate.

USD1027953S1

For example, USD1027953S1 shows an ornamental design for a computer mouse, where the solid lines in the image depict the inventive design and the broken lines depict portions that form no part of the claimed design. A design patent was granted for this computer mouse, as the presented design is a new, original, and ornamental design for an article of manufacture. The design patent does not include information about how the computer mouse works, and only claims “The ornamental design for a computer mouse, as shown and described”.

US6850224B2

Some innovations in computer mouse technology include developments in both form and function. US6850224B2 introduces a wearable ergonomic computer mouse. The computer mouse includes a mouse base (14) that is removably attached to a user’s hand, a mouse ball (12) supported within the base, and fingerstraps (20) that are removably attached to a user’s fingers. The fingerstraps (20) include mouse buttons (18) and a miniature mouse ball (22) for controlling operation of the computer mouse, in addition to the mouse ball of the base. This design separates and shuffles arrangement of the commonly known mouse ball and button elements. Consequently, technical modifications are made to the function of the wearable mouse compared to more common designs. The wearable mouse hasn’t seen widespread popularity, but the appeal of ergonomics continues to prevail, and innovators provide consumers with a wide range of options to best suit their interests.

This brief look into the history of computer mice shows how innovations in design can inspire functional improvements, how demands for new technical features may result in evolving designs for a well-known tool, and how intellectual property protections can be achieved for both design and utility.

McCoy Russell has the legal experience and technical expertise to help its clients develop and grow their intellectual property portfolios. Contact us if we can be of assistance.

The Role of Design Patents in Product Differentiation

A modern take on the traditional spider bucket, Design Patent D1,096,494 — SPIDEWEB LED BUCKET, granted on October 7, 2025 — demonstrates how a simple concept can be reimagined through creative design. The familiar silhouette of the spider bucket is enhanced with a web-inspired motif and integrated LED lighting, blending function with visual appeal in a way that feels both modern and inventive.

The SPIDEWEB LED BUCKET exemplifies how design innovation doesn’t always require reinventing the wheel — sometimes, it’s about rethinking the details. The illuminated web pattern not only adds aesthetic intrigue but also serves a practical purpose, improving visibility and usability in low-light environments. This thoughtful approach transforms an everyday utility item into a statement piece, highlighting how design can elevate the ordinary.

From an intellectual property standpoint, the design patent protects the bucket’s distinctive ornamental features, safeguarding the creator’s unique expression of form. Developing and securing design patents can help brands and businesses distinguish their products in crowded markets, ensuring that innovation in style and functionality is recognized — and protected.

McCoy Russell has a specialty design practice that makes use of both in-house drawing specialists and trusted drafts teams to support its clients’ in obtaining protections for their unique designs.

The USPTO welcomed its new Director, John Squires

The USPTO has welcomed John Squires as the new Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. In this role, he will work with colleagues to help shape intellectual property policy, foster innovation, and strengthen U.S. competitiveness on the global stage.

As a long-time practitioner and strong supporter of the patent system, Mr. Squires experience and perspective will impact the USPTO in ways that we hope will better support inventors, businesses, and all who rely on the patent and trademark system.

McCoy Russell continues to stay on top of shifts and policy changes at the USPTO to help innovators, businesses, and brands secure strong protection for their ideas and position themselves for success.

The Role of IP in Shaping the Future of Food

I ordered a salmon dish at a restaurant yesterday, and didn’t think twice about it being identified on the menu as “wildtype” as opposed to “wild caught” until after the meal, when the waitress handed me a card notifying me that I was among the first to try Wildtype cell cultivated salmon. That certainly piqued my interest, so I did some research on the process explained on the Wildtype website. In short, living cells are extracted from Pacific salmon, and cultivated under specific conditions (temperature, pH, nutrients, etc.). Once proliferated, the cells are harvested and combined with plant based ingredients in order to mimic the properties of natural salmon fish fillets.

The synthesized salmon does not taste exactly like natural salmon, however, benefits such as a lack of toxins found in wild caught and farm-raised salmon may outweigh the slightly different experience. Further, reducing prevalence of fishing and farming could have a positive impact on the environment. Although the nutritional profile does not quite match natural salmon fillets yet, the potential is promising as a possibly normalized salmon alternative. At the least, the future of food synthesis industries will be interesting to watch unfold as these potentially environmentally friendly alternatives seem to rapidly become more popular.

As companies like Wildtype push the boundaries of food innovation, the role of intellectual property becomes central. Protecting breakthrough processes, unique branding, and proprietary technologies is not just about safeguarding inventions—it’s about building long-term value and competitive advantage.

McCoy Russell recognizes that for businesses, clients, and brands entering emerging industries, developing a strong IP portfolio with the guidance of professionals ensures that investments in research, development, and market positioning are fully protected. A well-structured IP strategy can open doors to partnerships, attract investors, and secure a company’s place in a rapidly evolving marketplace. Contact us if we can be of assistance.

Amendments to the Design Examination Guidelines in Korea

The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) has revised the Design Examination Guidelines which went into effect on June 16, 2025. McCoy Russell shares the following updates.

  • Similarity Evaluation Between Entire and Partial Designs
    KIPO has revised its examination standard to correct the prior practice of automatically deeming partial designs dissimilar to full designs, regardless of actual visual similarity. Examiners must now assess similarity on a case-by-case basis, enabling more accurate evaluation and allowing related design registrations across entire and partial designs.
  • Automobile Interior Design Applications
    The amendment clarifies that multiple interior components of a vehicle—when functioning together as an integrated unit—can now be registered as a single design. This resolves prior inconsistencies where some examiners required separate registrations for each component.
  • Evidence Submission for Novelty Exceptions
    KIPO now allows examiners to issue a notice when an applicant claims an exception to loss of novelty but omits required evidence. This gives applicants a chance to correct the oversight, a change from previous practice where such claims were disregarded without notice.

McCoy Russell is a nationally ranked for its trademark practice and patent drafting quality and prosecution practice, and maintains an active international client base helping to build strong patent and trademark portfolios. The firm continues to monitor updates for national and international intellectual property offices to better serve clients.

John Russell Recognized in Chambers USA Guide for 2025

McCoy Russell congratulates John Russell on his continued recognition in Chambers and Partners USA Guide 2025 for his practice in intellectual property in Oregon.

John plays an active role in developing McCoy Russell’s patent strategies, working closely with clients in developing their intellectual property portfolios. As a former inventor at Ford Motor Company, John brings a unique and practical perspective to inventors and inventing teams when it comes to developing and securing protection for novel technologies. Further, John shares his practical perspective via his blog www.mriplaw.com – a top patent law blog independently maintained by John. With over 20 years of practice, John’s legal and technical expertise continues to support and benefit clients at all sizes, from start-ups to multi-national corporations.

Developing an Intellectual Property Portfolio: Regularly Review and Update

McCoy Russell understands the importance of regularly reviewing and updating a business’s IP portfolio and related strategy. Intellectual property assets are constantly evolving, and it is advantageous to ensure that your portfolio remains aligned with your evolving business goals and technological advancements.

By regularly reviewing your IP portfolio, you can identify any gaps or areas that may need additional protection. This proactive approach allows you to address any potential vulnerabilities before they become a problem. It also ensures that your portfolio provides comprehensive protection for your valuable intellectual property assets.

Technological advancements play a significant role in today’s business landscape. New technologies emerge, and existing ones evolve at a rapid pace. By staying up-to-date with these advancements, you can identify opportunities to enhance your IP portfolio. This may include filing new patent applications to protect innovative products or processes, or modify claims of pending applications to cover improvements or modifications.

Furthermore, reviewing and updating your IP portfolio allows you to align it with your evolving business goals. As your business expands into new markets or introduces new products or services, your IP strategy needs to adapt accordingly. By regularly assessing your portfolio, you can ensure that it supports your business objectives and provides the necessary protection in the areas that matter most to your company.

In addition to protecting your intellectual property assets, regularly reviewing and updating your portfolio and strategy can also have financial benefits. By identifying and addressing any gaps or weaknesses, you can avoid continuing with annuities or maintenance fees of applications no longer core to the business and for which infringement by competitors is unlikely or irrelevant to the business. It also allows you to optimize your IP strategy, ensuring that you are not wasting resources on unnecessary or ineffective protection.

To effectively review and update your IP portfolio, it is advisable to seek the assistance of an experienced intellectual property law firm. They can provide valuable insights and guidance, helping you identify areas that may need attention and suggesting strategies to enhance your portfolio’s protection.

McCoy Russell has the experience and expertise to provide the necessary guidance to ensure that your portfolio remains aligned with your evolving business goals and technological advancements. The firm is dedicated to providing comprehensive and tailored solutions for intellectual property needs. McCoy Russell’s expertise in IP law, combined with the understanding of the ever-changing business landscape, allows the firm to assist business’s in regularly reviewing and updating your IP portfolio effectively.

Aligning IP and Marketing with Business Goals

During the lifespan of a company, there is a continuous balancing of capital towards various expenses.  Two of the more consequential and frequently competing line items are advertising and patent protection.  Both can be essential to long-term success, but each serves a fundamentally different purpose – thus, what are important factors to consider to strike the right balance?

For companies in a “winner-takes-most” industry (like an Nvidia) or in a space with competitors filing a large number of patents, then a budget favoring patent protection may be preferred.  Alternatively, for companies in a service or a brand-based industry, advertising may be more important.

It can be difficult to measure the utility of a patent due to the significant time gap between filing a patent and its issue date, whereas advertising may yield a faster feedback loop.  In some instances, biasing marketing may be preferred if cash flow needs are more immediate.  However, this may hamstring long-term company growth.  Early patent filings may increase company valuations and deal leverage.  Patents may include the intrinsic benefit of providing legitimacy to a product in a crowded field.

Reverse engineering of a product may be another good reason to file a patent.  Alternatively, if a product has a secret formulation, such as Coca-Cola, it may be best to avoid public disclosure.

Regardless, both advertising and patent protection need to be executed correctly.  Miscalculated advertising campaigns can sow negative public sentiment.  Patents that are poorly drafted or narrow in scope may waste company money and open space for competitors to mimic or commercialize a competing product.  When considering developing a patent portfolio, it is important to work with a firm, such as McCoy Russell, that values client success and patent quality over financial gain. Contact us if we may be of assistance.