About Our Firm
Home > About > Our Firm
About Our Firm
Family Law News
|
If your team has been leaning on AI tools to generate blog posts, product images, or social content, here's a question worth asking before you publish the next one: who actually owns that content? For a lot of businesses, the honest answer is nobody, and that's a bigger problem than it sounds. The Basic Question The U.S. Copyright Office has been studying this since 2023, collecting public input and issuing guidance in stages. Its conclusion has stayed consistent throughout: copyright protection requires human authorship, and that requirement hasn't changed just because the tool doing the work became a lot more sophisticated. The case Thaler v. Perlmutter addressed this at the Federal level. A computer scientist generated an artwork entirely through an AI system and applied to register a copyright for the artwork, listing the AI system itself as the author. The Copyright Office refused registration, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that refusal in 2025, and on March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. That left the ruling standing: human authorship is a "bedrock requirement" of copyright, and content generated without meaningful human involvement simply falls outside of copyrightability. The harder, more practical question, one the Copyright Office has addressed in detail, is what happens when a human is the one typing the prompts. Its answer: prompts alone, no matter how detailed, generally don't make the person who wrote them the "author" of the output. A prompt functions more like an instruction than an expression, since the AI system is still the one making the real expressive choices, what the final image looks like, how a sentence is phrased, in between the prompt and the result.
Say you run a coffee shop called "Morning Ritual," and then a new café across town opens up as "Morning Rituals." Customers start mixing the two up online, tagging the wrong shop in reviews, showing up at the wrong location for a promotion you never ran. That mix-up isn't just annoying; it's the exact kind of consumer confusion trademark law exists to prevent. The question is what to actually do about it, and that depends on getting a few things right before you pick up the phone. Step One: Make Sure It's Actually Infringement Not every similar name is a legal problem. Before doing anything else, it's worth asking: Does the other mark sound, look, or read similarly to yours? Is it being used for the same or related goods and services? Would a typical customer plausibly confuse the two? If those answers point toward "yes," you likely have a legitimate case. If the businesses operate in unrelated industries, or serve genuinely separate markets, there may be no infringement at all, and pursuing it burns time and legal fees for nothing. Build Your Record First Once you're confident it's a real conflict, start collecting proof before reaching out: screenshots of their website, social posts, packaging, or ads, etc. Make sure you record the date you captured the evidence and save it. If this ends up going further than a polite email, you'll want that record intact. (If you think this might go to court, an attorney should forensically capture this information.) The Cease-and-Desist Letter Comes Next This is the standard opening move in nearly every trademark dispute. A good cease-and-desist letter identifies your registered mark, explains specifically why the other party's use creates a problem, and requests that they stop, typically within a set timeframe. Keep the tone firm but professional rather than combative. It's entirely possible the other business had no idea your mark existed when they picked their name, and a measured letter resolves more disputes than an aggressive one. Attorneys generally draft these rather than business owners doing it solo, mostly because getting the legal language and scope right matters if the letter ends up as evidence later. If the Letter Doesn't Land Sometimes it works. Sometimes it's ignored entirely. When that happens, litigation becomes the real option. To win a trademark infringement suit, you typically need to establish three things: that you hold a valid registered mark or are otherwise the Senior User (i.e., have earlier rights in the trademark than the other party), that the other party is using an identical or confusingly similar mark on similar goods or services, and that the use is actually causing confusion or diluting your brand’s distinctiveness. Courts don’t take a plaintiff’s word for that confusion, either. They apply structured, multi-factor tests to evaluate it. The Second Circuit's approach, first laid out in Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961) , weighs things like the strength of your mark, how similar the two marks actually are, how close the products or services sit to each other, and any evidence of real-world confusion among customers. Most circuits apply some version of this multi-factor analysis, and while the specific factors shift slightly by jurisdiction, the underlying question stays the same everywhere: would a reasonable consumer actually be confused? What Winning Actually Gets You If a court sides with you, the most common outcome is an injunction, a binding order requiring the other business to stop using the mark. Depending on how the infringement happened and how deliberate it was, courts can also award financial damages covering lost profits and possibly legal costs, and in cases involving outright counterfeiting, criminal penalties can come into play too. Know When to Let It Go Worth remembering: some overlap genuinely isn't infringement. Comparative advertising and legitimate news reporting can qualify for fair use protection, and two businesses with similar names in clearly distinct markets sometimes just coexist without either side having a real claim against the other. If you're staring down a name conflict and can't tell whether it's worth pursuing, that's exactly the kind of question worth getting a real answer to before spending money on a letter or a lawsuit. Contact Rosenthal IP Law today to schedule a consultation, and let's figure out where you actually stand.