text:
How to protect your brand with a registered trademark! w/ Lawyer Morris Turek
Morris Turek is a trademark attorney who helps entrepreneurs, businesses, and organizations avoid the devastating and disastrous effects of being sued for trademark infringement. He does this by clearing and protecting the names, logos, and slogans they use to advertise and sell their products and services. His practice is devoted exclusively to trademark matters, including trademark search and clearance, federal trademark registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, trademark registration maintenance and renewal, trademark opposition and cancellation matters, and general brand protection and enforcement issues. Morris has been practicing trademark law since 2005 and has had his own trademark law practice since 2009. You can learn more about Morris and his trademark services by visiting his website at YourTrademarkAttorney.com.
Morris discusses with John Barker :
1) How it specializes in Trademark law?
2) The process to get your brand protected?
3) Repeatedly correcting John on the differences between protecting your Brand and protecting IP.
4) Morris describes how differing laws at the local, state, and federal level affect your protection (i.e. we talk about Weed branding)
The Business Samurai is created and produced by John Barker at Barker Management Consulting
Speaker: 00:00:50
Hey everyone, welcome to the Business Samurai Podcast.
Got another fantastic episode for you today.
With me is Morris Turich.
He is my trademark attorney.
And actually, if you go to your trademark Attorney.com, he can be yours as well.
Morris helps entrepreneurs, businesses and organizations avoid the devastating and
disastrous effects of being sued for trademark infringement.
He does this by clearing and protecting the names, logos and slogans they use to
advertise and sell their products and services.
His practice is devoted exclusively to
trademark matters, including trademark search and clearance, federal trademark
registration with United States Patent and Trademark Office, trademark registration,
maintenance and renewal, trademark opposition and cancellation matters, and
general brand protection and enforcement issues.
Morris has been practicing trademark law
since 2005 and has had his own trademark law practice since 2009.
As mentioned before, you can learn a whole
bunch more about Morris by going your trademark Attorney.com, and I kid you not
before we jumped on Morris doesn't know I did this.
I actually just Googled trademark attorney and he's like four or five on the list of
the main page just by using the generic term and you've got your ads.
But then Morris is right there on the first page.
I must be doing something right. Thank you.
You are absolutely doing something right.
I was just curious.
I was curious with the domain.
Thanks for taking the time. Oh, it's my pleasure.
Thanks for having me.
So what did I miss in the bio? Is there
anything any notable things that I've missed?
I don't think so. I think that pretty much covers it.
I'm a trademarker here in St.
Louis, but I serve businesses and entrepreneurs located all over the world.
So I've seen a lot of Law and Order SVU,
but I haven't seen Law and Order trademark attorney.
No, that would not be a very interesting episode.
I guess that's what kind of curious.
What was the drive?
What was the niche to get into that?
Because I know a lot of criminal defense
attorneys I know civil your family attorneys and things of that nature.
But what was the interest in trademark?
Well, I fell into it.
I was working at a law firm in Illinois as
a law clerk during my second year of law school.
The summer after my second year of law
school, I was working as a law clerk at a small law firm in Illinois doing class
action litigation, which was terrible, but it was good legal experience.
And I actually started dating a girl named Karen.
It all worked out well, not with Karen, but it all worked out for my career.
Through Karen, I met another trademark.
I met a trademark attorney named Annette, who is Karen's aunt.
And while I was working at the law firm, Illinois, Karen's aunt contacted me and
asked if I would do some research for her on a project she was working on, and she
would pay me and just do a little research on the side.
I did. And then she asked me to do another
project during the summer, which I did as well.
And then after the summer and starting my third year of law school, she asked if I
wanted to become a law clerk for her and learn trademark law.
And I said, Well, I hate what I'm doing at this law firm now, so sounds good to me.
And so that's how I fell into trademark law.
So I started working for her a few days a week after classes, and
that's how I learned it, and that's how I fell into it.
Got you. So in your law school days,
is there, like general courses that no matter what type of legal profession
you're going into, everybody takes and then you kind of pick a niche? Or was this
something that was totally, like, on the job type of on the job training?
Well, during the first year of law school,
you're required to take certain classes, none of which are trademark law, very
general classes, like property, criminal, constitutional, things like that.
After your first year of law school, you have more leeway on what you want to take.
I did take trademark law.
I also took Copyright law as well.
But I took trademark law after I started working with Annette already.
And so I sort of had a one up on everybody in that class because I was getting actual
practical experience, and I kind of understood what was going on.
In fact, I ended up getting the highest grade in the trademark class.
I forget what they call it now, but it's a little award you get at the end of the
semester for having the highest grade in the class.
But I felt like it was a fraud because I
had so much more experience than anybody else in the class.
Okay. But you weren't, like, teaching the teacher at that point?
I was not teaching the teacher.
No, but it did give me a really nice foundation for the class.
It was great. Oh, yeah.
No, I imagine every year I keep a track of, like, state
laws and, hey, we've got new motor laws, we got stuff like that.
How often this trademark and Copyright law actually gets updated.
Is it frequently reviewed like other areas?
It does.
I would say law in a lot of different areas is fairly slow to change.
Recently, though, there has been a lot of
Supreme Court US Supreme Court decisions in the trademark and Copyright fields.
For example, just a couple of years ago,
there was a case having to do with an Asian musical band called The Slants.
And it was basically about whether the
Trademark Office could constitutionally prevent the registration
of trademarks that are seen as disparaging of a group of people.
This Asian band wanted to register the name The Slants and Slants is sort of a
derogatory name for Asians, and they were initially refused.
They went all the way up to the Supreme
Court on this, and they got the law to change the stream court
knocked down the prohibition against the registration disparaging marks.
And there's been a number of other trademark cases as well.
The Booking.com case, which was very
recent, ruled that a name plus the.com is not necessarily generic.
So now it may be possible to register
things like Law.com or Computer.com if it's whereas before you couldn't.
And so that's been a change in the laws as well.
And I'm simplifying that.
But there's been some changes.
In fact, just yesterday, there was a
Copyright case out of the Supreme Court about Copyright registration and about
what happens if there's a mistake on the Copyright registration.
And is the Copyright registration still enforceable?
Things are happening at the highest yeah, right now, there's a
lot of trademark litigation because it's a bunch of businesses fighting over stuff.
There's a lot of trade milk litigation.
Most of that never gets to a decision, and most of it certainly never gets appealed,
where you get like a reported decision on an interesting point of law.
But, yeah, there's plenty of litigation, and laws do change more.
So with trademark registration, the procedures have changed a lot.
The ways to challenge trademark
applications and registrations have changed.
There's new procedures called expungement and re examination that were just put into
effect this year that have opened up some more avenues for attorneys to challenge
trimmer registrations that may be fraudulent or improperly issued.
So, yeah, there's lots of different things.
In fact, one of the more recent ones, too, about foreign entities.
If you're not located in the United States, the Trademark Office just a couple
of years ago made a rule that says you have to use a US attorney.
You can't do it yourself anymore.
You have to use a US attorney, which of
course, now opens up a nice chunk of business for US attorneys.
So I'm not complaining.
Like somebody that happens to be on the homepage of Google.
If it's just going to benefit me, I mean, I'm not going to say no, but it's been a
nice especially like out of Canada and Australia.
In the UK. Sure.
Because with Amazon and all these other
online platforms, it's easy for these people to sell in the United States.
I mean, it's a huge market and now they
want to protect their trademarks and their brands in the United States.
And here I am, ready to help. Got you.
How often speaking of going in the Supreme
Court, how often do these infringement cases actually go to I don't know if they
go to jury trials or things of that nature.
How that process works is that frequently that happens.
Is there's some risk reward metric that goes, hey, we're going to really push the
button on these guys because they're selling our logo on something else.
I imagine it's probably the bigger the company.
But how often does that happen? Yeah.
I mean, like every other area of law, most
litigation never goes to decision, never goes to trial.
Because number one, it's very expensive.
Number two, litigation is very uncertain.
You might think you have the best case in
the world, but who knows what a jury is going to do or a judge is going to do?
And plus, sometimes usually these
trademark disputes and Copyright disputes, these are really just business disputes.
And do you want a judge or a jury of twelve people who don't even understand
your business necessarily making the decision?
No. You'd rather have the two business people
kind of come into some kind of agreement, some kind of compromise.
So, yeah, very a tiny percentage ever go to a decision and then even a smaller,
like an infinitescible number go to appeal, and that's where all the action is
really on the appeals, a very small amount.
I don't know how much this is going to be completely off the wall.
And I'm by no far an expert.
But have you been tracking what's going on with the NFTs, the nonfungible tokens?
I'll lead it with that before I go into a
secondary where my real question is that I'm not going to lie.
I'm not really up to date on NFT, though.
My associate Kevin is a little more into
it and he's sort of teaching me a little bit more about it, which is good.
But yeah, it's huge. Actually.
A case has been recently filed by,
I don't know, you say Hermes or Hermes, H-E-R-M-E-S.
It's like the fashion brand.
They just filed a suit recently against somebody who's been using
and created a whole bunch of NFTs without having to do with one of their bags.
Birken.
Maybe somebody out there knows what I'm talking about.
They sell T shirts for like $500.
I would never know anything about this.
But anyway, it's getting big, right?
Because now it's like you're not even now,
these brands, especially these well known brands, now they have to protect their
trademarks against virtual goods, Metaverse things.
Again, I'm not versed in the Metaverse, but these are all things I'm going to have
to learn about as they become more and more prevalent.
And I guess that goes into where I was thinking, where you see this
could head because people are able to sell a share.
Quite frankly, it could be a share of their brand.
Some of the stuff that I'm hearing about is you've seen everybody buying these NFPs
of the monkeys or whatever, but you're going, hey, I've copied this.
I trademarked this, but at the same time,
I'm going to flip it into an NFP and sell somebody the rights to that.
I don't know how the level of complication
from a legal perspective that may well probably is starting to turn into that
now, but could really explode over the next several years.
Yeah, this is going to be huge, as well as things like cryptocurrency.
This is a big one now,
and lots of other different areas that are starting to really grow.
There's a lot of intersection, from what I can tell, between trademark, Copyright,
NFT, these virtual goods, and they're all going to kind of play together.
I did recently just see a news article.
I think it was on watching TV.
I think I saw it on Fox News.
It was just a story yesterday about somebody was killed.
The killing of somebody was streamed online.
It was a young woman.
the father of the victim is trying to get the media to stop playing this footage.
Now, the father is not the owner of the footage of the video, right.
He didn't shoot the video. Somebody streamed it.
Whoever streamed it is the owner, whoever he sold it to, but it's not the father.
So he was talking about how he was
speaking with some legal counsel and instead he wants to try to make an NST out
of this video in order to try to prevent its broadcast and dissemination.
Now, I didn't really understand it because if he's not the copy of owner, how can you
make just an NFT out of something you don't even own?
I didn't quite understand that.
And maybe somebody out there can explain
this to me, but it was interesting how they are trying to use NFT
to try to circumvent somebody's Copyright in this footage.
And that's something I have been thinking about going, even with what I've been
doing with you, with the business Samurai logo and the name together going,
what would really stop somebody that got creative and said, hey, that's kind of
cool looking or whatever, I want to screw with somebody, and they go through the
minting process, I believe is the term and turn it into that fungible token.
What is to stop somebody from doing that?
And then you get a dispute outside of me
going, hey, Morris, man, Where's that stuff on the US website that I can go?
No, I did this like three years ago.
I'm wondering where that intersection is going to be.
Yeah, I think it's brand new.
I don't think anybody really knows.
Until we start getting cases filed and
decisions from judges and juries and especially those that are appealed,
we're not really going to have a lot of answers.
I think it's unlikely that this stuff is going to happen to sort of the, quote,
unquote the run of the mill trademark, because what's the value?
But I think luxury brands, very well known brands, famous brands.
I think they're going to run into a whole bunch of it.
Like I said, Ermest is ready running into problems.
Interesting. Yeah.
No, it's going to be.
And also from the you just see the way the political process works.
I mean, you got a lot of aging lawmakers that may be going, what is this?
Having watched enough congressional testimony in my life to go, all right,
dude, you're talking about an iPhone as you're flashing around your Android.
I don't have a lot of hope for blockchain technology.
Yeah. But I tell you, it is very interesting.
And like I said, my associate was younger than me.
He's like seven or eight years younger than me.
He's kind of getting more into it.
So like I said, he's kind of educating me on it, which is nice.
Cool. All right, let's shift gears a little bit.
So someone's got an idea or they did, like
just in point blank, I sit there and had an idea.
I had read a book.
It's like everybody should have something that they can trademark.
And it was from a consulting standpoint
that was something that they could lay back on.
I can't remember the reasoning.
I had read that years ago.
When should a company reach out with
something that they've developed and go, hey, I really need to get look into
getting some protection behind my brand just to kind of give some background.
Obviously, trademarks are brands, right?
Trademarks are names or logos or slogans that are used in connection with the
advertising and sale of products or services.
And really, unless you're using a completely generic name, like you run a
pet store and you called yourself pet store.
If you did that, then you don't really have a trademark.
But most people don't do that.
Most people come up with some cool little
name for their business or whatever the organization or whatever it might be.
So everyone's got a trademark.
The question is, when does it come time to want to register
it, protect it federally, and registering that trademark with the United States
Patent and Trademark Office, the USPTO gives the owner of the trademark the
exclusive nationwide right to use that Mark in connection with the products and
services that are listed in the trademark registration.
somebody who might only, let's say, for example, let's say somebody has a
restaurant and they call it ABC Restaurants.
Terrible name. Hopefully nobody did that.
But let's say there is an ABC restaurant and they're just operating in St.
Louis, Missouri.
Without a trademark registration, their rights will extend to the St.
Louis Metro area, essentially.
However, if you get the trademark registration, if you register the ABC
restaurant federally with the United States Pound and Trademark Office, then
your rights now have expanded throughout the nation, not just St.
Louis. What does that do?
It blocks other people from using a
similar name for similar services anywhere in the United States.
And if they do, then the owner of the
trademark has the legal ability to stop that infringement.
So that's the power of the registration.
So when do you want to get the registration?
Well, there are business considerations and there are legal considerations.
Let me talk about the legal considerations first.
The legal consideration is you want to
file as early as possible with the trademark office because the day you file
is the day that you reserve the exclusive right to use the name.
So if you wait, it's possible that somebody else might file the trademark
application for a similar name for similar products or services, which would then
exclude you from using your name for your products and services.
So from a legal perspective, it's really
good to file as early as possible even before you start using the name, because
you can file a trademark application on an intent to use basis to reserve the name.
It doesn't have to be in use yet.
Which is what I did. Which is what you did.
And which is what I'd say 80% of my clients do.
The intent to use system is
great for businesses now from a business consideration.
Well, now we're really talking about is my business even going to be successful?
Am I even intending to operate outside of my local area?
Like if I'm a gardener and I only provide gardening services in my local area, I
don't think it's probably worth getting a trademark registration.
What do you need it for?
You have your little rights in St.
Louis, Missouri, and you're fine.
But if you sell products and that you could sell those products on
Amazon and anywhere else and they could be shipped anywhere in the country, then I
think getting a trademark registration early makes sense.
Now from a business consideration, maybe your product is going to be a dud.
Right. So now you start selling these products,
you're not making any money, and now you spend money on a trademark application
that isn't going to go anywhere because you're going to fold your business.
So what do you need to trademark registration for?
So it's kind of like you're kind of
balancing the legal and the business considerations.
Got you.
Yeah, that totally makes sense for people not familiar with it
in a condensed form. What is the process like to go register?
Well, the first thing we generally
recommend doing is performing a search on whatever trade market is that you want to
register some kind of name or slogan or tagline or something like that.
We would generally want to do a comprehensive federal trademark search on
the name to check for conflicts or issues that would prevent the successful
registration of the Mark and that searches.
We usually have those kinds of results in about a week.
And then based on those results,
if the trademark looks clear, then we can file a trademark application with the
USPTO, and that reserves it as of the date of the filing.
Now, it's going to take the entire
registration process is probably going to take over a year and sometimes quite a bit
longer than a year, depending on a lot of different circumstances.
But again, all of your rights date back to the filing date of the application.
So let's say it took three years to get a trademark registration.
All of your rights date back to the very day you filed.
And if anybody started using a similar
trademark for similar products or services during the tendency of the application,
then that person would be an infringer and you could stop that infringement.
Yes. And I remember when we were talking back,
I want to say the initial kickback for me was about 18 months, I believe.
What are some of the I'm guesstimating because it's been long enough now.
But what are some of the extenuating circumstances?
Why does that process take so long to hear back from them?
Yeah. Well, in your case, there was a little bit
of a wrinkle, but generally speaking, right now it's taking the trademark of
office about seven or eight months to even look at your application.
Okay. Okay.
Now once they look at it, let's say everything's good.
They do their own search.
They didn't find any conflicts.
Then it goes through what's called a publication period, which is a 30 day
period where anybody can challenge the application or oppose it, assuming nobody
opposes it, then it goes to the next phase.
If the trademark application was filed on
an in use basis, meaning that the trademark was already being used at the
time you filed your application, then the registration issues.
But if it wasn't being used at the time
you filed the application, then what's called the notice of allowance issues, and
then you have to show use of the Mark to get the registration.
And you have six months from the notice of allowance date to show use.
And if you can't show use in those six months, you can get an extension for
another six months, and you can actually get up to five extension six months each.
So you can actually hold the trademark application open if you wanted to for like
four or five years from the date that you file.
If it's an intent to use application now, what are some of the extenuating
circumstances that makes that process even longer.
Let's say you get a rejection.
Like, let's say the Tripping office reviews your application, says, hey, we
think there's a confusing similar trademark that's already registered.
Well, then if the owner of the application wants to try to argue around that
rejection, argue against it, then we can prepare and file a response.
Of course, then that takes time, and then
it takes a trademark office time to review that response.
So that makes the process longer.
Another thing that would make the process longer is if somebody challenges the
application, opposes it, or if somebody in your case, John, what happened with you is
that someone actually filed an extension of time to oppose your application.
If I remember correctly, something like that, yes.
It's been so long now, I remember something weird.
Somebody filed an extension, so they were
considered somebody else was considering opposing but chose not to.
So they kind of stopped your application?
I think it was for like 90 days.
And then they decided not to file an opposition.
And then your application went through the process.
So that delayed it by another 9120 days.
Those are the kinds of things that make the process longer.
But again, people kind of get hung up on like, oh, my God, this is taking so long.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It doesn't matter how long it takes.
From a legal perspective, it could take ten years.
All of your rights are going to date back to the filing of the application.
In fact, I had a client recently whose
application has been put on hold for a number of reasons.
I won't go into it, but for a number of
reasons, it's been on hold for five years, over five years now.
And it's just the way the process works when this happens.
There's not a lot we can do.
We sort of have to play the waiting game, but it all worked out at the end.
So we go through the process, you get approved, it's in use.
What is necessary then to keep it through that renewal period?
What are they looking for?
How often do you got to go through that
process to check in and say, yes, still active.
I'm the Pepsi of whatever I'm doing is still going on.
What's that process like? Yeah.
So currently the first renewal, or they call it really a
maintenance period between the fifth and the 6th year of registration.
So once you get your trademark issued, you
really don't have to do anything for six years.
So you have to maintain the registration
between the fifth and 6th year of registration.
And that requires filing what's called the declaration of use.
And that basically tells the Trademark
office that, yes, I'm still using the trademark.
Here's some proof of that.
And then they will renew your or maintain your registration.
The next period is really a renewal
period, and that renewal period is between the 9th and the 10th year of registration.
That renewal period again requires that you show use of the Mark, you file what's
called, again, a declaration of use and a request to renew the registration.
And assuming it's accepted, then your
registration doesn't need to be renewed again for another ten years.
So it's not really onerous or it's even not even all that expensive.
When you divide it by the number of years
that the registration is active before you have to do anything, it's not even very
expensive, but you have to kind of remember to do it.
Thankfully, the Trademark Office does send
out reminders over email to tell you, hey, it's time.
If you have an attorney, then it's in their system.
So we send out reminders. Right.
But, yeah, it's certainly not as onerous
as some other types of law where you have to renew things every year
or file annual reports on your Corporation, things like that.
So, yeah, it's actually really pretty simple.
One of the things I heard, something I can't remember what I was listening to
about somebody filing a very weird trademark thing.
And I know the process that we went
through when you were looking up, this is Samurai, and we had to combine the name
and the logo versus having them as two separate entities.
I do remember that.
But I came across I don't know if you can see it on your screen.
I was trying to find the recent one of
what I heard on the radio, and it was so obscure.
I'm like, I'm sitting there going, how can you trademark that?
That's how common the phrase was.
But during that research, I came across this website.
It was like, T Mobile has copyrighted the magenta color.
Why or how do they get away?
How do those bigger companies get away with copyrighting colors?
Is it very limited that I can't be a telecommunications company selling cell
phones and use magenta because they copyrighted not the name, but the color?
Like the Hex color.
What's the nuances when you start getting into splitting hairs with stuff like that?
Yeah, well, just to be clear, we're not talking about Copyright.
This is trademark. So they didn't Copyright.
And this is me being stupid and asking the questions.
Thank you. I just want to clarify.
So you're right, you cannot Copyright a color.
That's not possible right now.
What you can do, though, is you can
protect a color as a trademark for specific products or services.
T Mobile's magenta color is an example of this.
Right now, it's very hard to do.
You have to be able to prove to the satisfaction of the Trademark Office that
consumers associate this particular color with this particular product or service.
Now, that's very difficult to do. Right.
I mean, if you're just a small business, that would be impossible for you to prove.
But when you have millions and millions of customers, and you do surveys and you say,
hey, if I show you this color, what service does this remind you of?
And they say, TMobile.
Well, that's very good evidence that this has now become a trademark.
People associate this color with a very
specific service or product from a very specific business.
Another example of this is the Kodak Yellow.
I know I'm dating myself here, but if you remember, like the film boxes from Kodak,
they were all this Golden Rod that was also a trademark of the Kodak Company.
Another example is the pink color of Owens Corning insulation.
Home insulation, that pink color, the Pink Panther installation.
That pink color is a trademark of the Owens Corning Corporation because people
associate that pink color with that installation and only that installation.
And so over time, that became a trademark.
One of the ones I found interesting on the screen was the term superhero.
Yeah. Dc or Marvel.
I think it's both.
It happened to be on this.
Again, I was not looking for this specifically, but I found that to be
interesting that Marvel and DC had trademarked the term superheroes,
particularly in this particular movie age that we're in.
Yeah, that's absolutely true.
And there are many other types of
trademarks which I didn't touch on because they're more rare.
But like, for example, Sound can be a trademark.
A good example is the NBC Chimes.
Ding, Ding, Ding.
Certainly a trademark.
I didn't even have to say NBC Chime.
I could have gone Ding, Ding, Ding.
And you wouldn't know exactly what I was talking about.
Or like the Red Robin.
Like Red Robin. Yum.
Also a Sound trademark.
The law and order.
The dumb was on the one.
Yeah, absolutely.
Those are trademarks.
Also, sent can be a trademark.
Now, this is very rare, exceedingly rare.
But very recently, I'd say within the last
two or three years, the company that manufactures Plato, I think it's Hasbro.
But don't quote me on that.
They were able to achieve a trademark registration for the scent of Plato.
And when you think about it, like you and I, we're not kids, John.
And we probably haven't smelled Plato in decades.
I know I haven't. I don't have kids.
Maybe you do. I don't know.
But I haven't smelled Plato in decades.
But I still know what Plato smells like.
If you put something in front of me, cover it up, and I smelled it and it
smelled like Plato, I'd be able to tell you that was Playdoh.
And so they were able to get a trademark
ready because people associate that scent with that product.
So it's a trademark.
I guess then perfume and Cologne companies would do things of that nature.
If you've got something that was you could it's very distinct.
You've got to be very too.
But again, the problem with perfumes and colognes.
Is that people expect perfumes and colognes to smell a certain way.
Sometimes floury sometimes spicy, whatever it might be.
So it's harder to prove that a consumer actually associates a very
specific sense with a very specific product.
I think that's tougher to do.
I'm not saying impossible, but when you have something like Plato, a
clay, well, clay doesn't usually have any scent.
And if you do, it's like, you don't think
of the scent as being a part of the product.
Like, it just happens to have a scent
because that's the way it was manufactured and it just smells that way.
But that's not with Playdoh.
It's like people know what that scent is like.
You could open up the canister and be like, oh, yeah, it's the Playdoh scent.
It's a little bit different than for,
like, clones and perfumes, because those are supposed to smell, whereas clay is
like, that's not the purpose of the product.
Something that I had an issue with. This was a long time ago.
And I'll be honest with you, now that you've corrected me a couple of times, I'm
still confused a little bit between Copyright, trademark.
Do you want me to give the difference real quick?
Yeah, please. Okay, so trademarks are names, logos,
slogans, smells, colors that are used to advertise and sell products and services.
They're used to distinguish between certain types of products and services.
For example, if you had
two dark bottles of Cola on the store shelf and none of them had a label, you
wouldn't know if you were buying Coca Cola or Pepsi or Dr Pepper or whatever.
We need trademarks to identify products and to distinguish between them.
Right. And services as well.
You need to know when you go to a restaurant, it's got to have a sign on it
or you don't know what restaurant you're eating at.
It's got to say McDonald's or Burger King or Taco Bell.
So you see all the fancy places I eat, right.
So that's a trademark.
It identifies the source of the product
and service, and it helps consumers distinguish between products and services.
Now what's a Copyright?
Copyright protects original works of authorship.
So, for example, books, movies, music, drawings, paintings,
sound recordings, things that are original, things that are more creative,
though Copyright, it doesn't necessarily have to be creative.
But when you think about Copyright, you
kind of think of like original creative works.
I've seen on your website, but I guess explain the difference then of when you
would use the TM versus the C in the circle.
And I think that's why once you get it fully adjudicated, I'm
going to use the term adjudicated, but you can slap me on that one, too.
But to start using the C versus the TM,
can you explain a little bit of how that to identify it?
Well, you're crossing two different types of social property, right.
The circle C is for Copyright.
So when you write a book, you might say in
inside cover, you're going to write like if you're the author of the book, if
you're the Copyright owner of the book, you're going to write circle C.
And then if I wrote it in 2022, I'm going
to write 2022, and then I'm going to write Morris Turk.
That's Copyright notice.
It tells people who owns the Copyright in the book.
When you watch a movie at the end of the
credits, the credits, it always says Copyright whoever, Sony Pictures.
That tells you who owns the Copyright in the movie.
Now, the TM is a symbol that
you may choose to use in connection with your trademark.
So, for example, if I open up a restaurant
called ABC Restaurant, I could put a little TM next to ABC Restaurant,
regardless of whether it's registered federally as a trademark or not.
I can use the TM.
If you have a federally registered trademark.
So let's say I federally register ABC
Restaurant with the USPTO, then I can use the circle R symbol, the R in the circle.
So Copyright is a C in a circle.
Trademarks R in a circle. Got you.
I'll save my story then because the issue
I had years ago was a Copyright issue on Photos.
That does not apply necessarily to this.
Now that I know the differences.
Glad I could clear it up. Yeah.
That helps because sometimes I can be slow and dense on certain things.
That's very confusing.
In fact, it doesn't help when you hear you listen to the news and
they use these terms patent, trademark, Copyright, they just use them
interchangeably, like if they're the same thing and it's very confusing.
But, yeah, they're very different.
They protect different things.
So, yeah, it's important to know the differences with these things.
Once you've got it, you've got approved everything's in the system.
Right. And let's say you have built up let's say
you have built up your brand to be at a significant point where you're going out
there to make sure there's no infringement.
How do you maintain that knowledge of
somebody is doing something they're not supposed to with it?
Well, when you're a big brand, that's the Nike of the world, right.
The Google of the world, the Amazon of the world.
They have teams of attorneys that hire these trademark monitoring and
trademark watch services that basically scour not only the trademark offices,
records, but also uses throughout the Internet.
They have these tools that basically will try to find infringements.
And then as the trademark owner, you can address those infringements.
Now, if you're a big company with tons of
money and tons of attorneys, okay, you can do that all day when you're smaller.
When you're a smaller outfit,
it's not expensive to monitor to have a monitoring service.
But the question is, what then do you do with that information?
Let's say the monitoring service finds a few infringements of your Mark.
Well, you're a small Fry do you have the money to actually pursue this?
Do you have the money to go to court?
I know I tell you, a lot of my clients
don't, and I represent very small and startup businesses.
So it's like it's one thing to have the
knowledge of the infringement, but then what do you do with that?
And some attorneys might disagree with me,
especially ones that represent larger businesses.
But I don't think it's a great idea to just go seeking out infringements.
I don't think that makes a whole lot of sense.
What I do think makes sense is if you run into one, like, for example, a customer
comes to you and says, hey, did you know that somebody is using this Mark?
And it's very similar to yours?
And I thought it might have been you.
That shows that there was maybe some confusion.
Right. And that's when you might want to look
into that and maybe take some action because it was brought to your attention.
But to just go seek these things out, just to be sending cease and desist letters and
getting into litigation doesn't seem to me to make a lot of sense.
Is there fair use with some of these ones,
particularly with the bigger ones where if you're doing news stories or things of
that nature where you can actually use them without facing consequences?
There's fair use, both in Copyright and trademark.
But yes, absolutely.
If you're reporting on something about, say, Nike shoes, you have every right to
use the term Nike to describe those shoes, to refer to those shoes.
So we call it nominative fair use.
And there are other fair uses, parody,
satire, things of that nature that you can use trademarks to make a point.
Those don't tend to be the infringement
that businesses, especially even like larger brands, care about as much.
Like, yeah, they may not be happy with a
satire or a parody, but they're not going to attempt to really stop you.
They're more concerned about these things, especially if you're like the Nike of the
world, like counterfeit products coming into the USA with the Nike on it.
That's what they want to stop.
Even though these big companies have
limitless resources, I think they do tend to pick and choose their battles,
especially in the Internet age where it's just whack a mole.
You try to stop one thing and then nothing pops up.
I think the Internet has made them have to pick and choose their battles a little bit
more than maybe they used to because they spend every day, all day just
trying to crack down and it's never going to work.
I've seen a mix of this.
And again, there's going to be bleed over between some trademark with the brand as
well as Copyright with what I see on YouTube, where what I see some creators
complain about getting dinged on for fair use.
And then I'm watching another one upload
an entire movie trailer to their channel, and it's got a million views.
But the guy that's got 10% of that is constantly getting the demonetization.
So are they picking winners and losers in that battle?
I've tried to reach out.
I actually want to talk to some of them
from business standpoint on how that functions.
But it feels like some of those companies on that enforcement front are picking
winners and losers in that category because they don't like them or not.
You might be right. And that happens.
That's more on the Copyright side than the trademark side.
Again, I do some Copyright work, but the
vast majority of my practice is trademarked.
The bigger problem in the trademark arena
right now are people who register trademarks with the trademark office.
And maybe these trademark registrations are questionable at best.
Okay. And downright fraudulent at worst.
And then they use these registrations in an unfair manner to take down their
competitors on Amazon and Etsy and other selling platforms.
So then they're clearing their competition.
And what's bad about it is that the victim.
Well called the victim whose stuff was taken down these
platforms, it's impossible to get it back up
without the person who sent the takedown notice, without their
consent, without their permission to put it back up.
It's almost like guilty until proven innocent.
I kind of get it.
Like these companies don't want to be arbiters of IP disputes.
And really, should they be? No.
That's why we have courts.
And if I was running like Amazon or Etsy and some of these other ebay things like
that, I wouldn't just take down
a listing because somebody showed me a trademark registration.
I would at least give the other side an
opportunity to respond before taking it down.
But these platforms are so crazy.
They're so crazy because I represent some bigger Amazon sellers.
And I've had times when, like,
somebody with literally a fraudulent registration has taken their stuff down
and they have had so much trouble getting their stuff back up.
Luckily, some of my clients are such big
Amazon sellers that they have some they got some poll.
They got some poll, and they know who to talk to at Amazon.
Sure. And they can get these things resolved.
But your average person, oh, my God, it's like the Wild West.
And I just say one thing.
These places like Amazon and
for some reason believe that just because you have a trademark registration means
that you have some legitimate trademark rights.
I mean, that isn't the case.
Trademark registrations are obtained fraudulently all the time.
There's false and misleading information and trademark registrations all the time.
It's also possible that someone who got the trademark registration actually
achieved it after somebody had been using it.
Let's say I've been using a trademark for
20 years and I never registered it with a federal trademark office.
And then somebody else gets a trademark
registration for the same name for similar products or services.
I was first, and now you're taking me down.
But these platforms like Amazon, they don't care.
They don't even consider it.
They just take down your listing, and then it's up to you to figure out what to do.
Is there something if somebody is starting
out and they're kind of going, what's out there?
I want to be creative. I want to come up with something.
Is there an easy way for them to start doing some pre research if they know they
want to go down the legal route and not kind of get themselves in trouble?
They can go on the Tray Mark office website.
They have an ID, a very basic search system called Test, and they can type in a
word or a phrase and kind of see what comes up, see if they see any conflicts.
Now, again, you kind of have to understand what you're looking at.
I mean, this is the problem, right?
You might get a list of 100 marks. Right.
And you can go through each of the
trademark applications or registrations and see kind of what it says.
But unless you are familiar with trademark registration, a lot of the information in
these registrations and applications isn't going to make a whole lot of sense to you.
It would be like putting a book of Chinese
in front of me and saying, hey, interpret this.
I can't read Chinese, so I'm not going to be able to do that.
So the better option is to have an attorney do a search
on whatever it is that they want to use, and then that attorney can do the search
and then give you an opinion as to whether there are any conflicts or issues with
using and or trying to register that trademark with the USPTO.
Awesome. Now if somebody reaches out,
is there like a preferred list of things that you prefer that they
have together to give you right off the gate? Is there stuff that annoys you that
somebody comes in and says, hey, I've done these things, and you're like, why did you
do all of this stuff? You made my job harder. How do you prefer to new clients
to approach you with the process to make it as simple as possible?
Well, I think the Internet has been very good and very bad.
Where's the wisdom?
So everybody doctors must feel this way, too, right.
When the patients come in and say, man, I
was webmding this, and I know I have some rare disease out of Africa.
I must have it because I have all these
symptoms, and then doctors like, you have a cold.
But is it great that people can research and learn on the Internet?
Absolutely. That's wonderful.
The same is true for trademark.
There's a lot of information out there.
My website is chock full of information
about trademarks and the trademark registration process.
But when people come to you and they've
done all this research, and they believe that they understand what's going on.
Nine times out of ten, they really don't understand.
Obviously, they don't understand the
nuances, because unless you're an attorney and do this all
the time, you don't really understand the nuances.
But they also don't always understand the basics.
I don't expect them to know the basics.
They don't need to know anything about trademarks.
When they contact me, I can educate them.
It doesn't take me very long to do that.
But the problem is that people come to you and they think they know,
and then you say something like, well, it's great that you did this research, and
it's great that you use tests and you didn't.
Apparently, we find any conflicts.
I recommend now that we take the next step and do a more comprehensive search to make
sure that there are no conflicts or issues.
And then they say, no, it's fine.
I did my search, I did my research. It's all good.
And you try to explain to them, yes, you
did your search, but that's a cursory research.
That's a rudimentary search.
Try to explain it to them, but sometimes
they feel like they've done everything they needed to do.
Okay, well, you're not going to convince some people.
The people who come to me are the people the people I like the most, the people
that are easiest to work with are the people who are open minded, people who
have maybe done a little bit of research and kind of got interested.
But they have questions.
Of course you're going to have questions.
They're willing to listen.
They're willing to be open and honest about what they want to do.
Sometimes people come to me and they want to be a little shady.
They want to try to do something maybe a
little shady, which is fine, maybe we can do something shady.
We got to look into it.
But then they feel like maybe even like a little embarrassed talking about it,
especially if the product or service may be a little risque.
That's possible.
The people who come to me that I think we had the most success with are the
people who have done maybe a little bit of research, have an open mind, and are
willing to be open and honest with me about what they're wanting to accomplish.
You actually triggered a couple of things as you were talking.
One of the ways I get around the web and the conversation is I actually will say,
hey, listen, I read the medical Journal from Johns Hopkins.
That usually goes a little better than Webmv.
I don't know if there's a high research for the trademark or webmv version of
trademark, but jokes aside, you trigger something on things that may be risky.
I got a buddy of mine.
State of Virginia is starting to loosen
its rules around cannabis in the use of that.
I can use that as an example because each state is different.
And of course, federal is still completely illegal.
Are there things that prevent you in those types of industries where state and
federal law don't match up that you got to be on the lookout for when you do your
research or do you just got to stay hands off completely?
Yeah. This is actually a huge issue right now
with the CBD and cannabis industry with trademarks.
So the rule from a federal standpoint is that you cannot register a trademark for
any product or any service that is illegal under federal law.
Now, that would not prevent you from registering the same trademark for the
same federally illegal product or service at the state level.
Every state has their own trademark registry.
So if you wanted to register your
trademark, unless your trademark is used to sell cannabis or cannabis related
products and you did that in California, where it's legal, okay.
You could register your trademark in the state of California and you would have
whatever rights a California state trademark registration provides you.
You will have no rights at the federal level.
Zero. Because it's an illegal product.
Now, the question, though, is what is illegal?
And a lot of people don't even know what's
illegal because the federal government isn't enforcing federal law.
If the federal government was enforcing federal law, there'd be no cannabis
dispensaries anywhere and anywhere in the United States.
Right. It'd all be shut down.
It's technically illegal.
And anything that's illegal under federal law cannot be legal under state law.
Right. The supremacy clause of the Constitution.
So a lot of people this is a very common one that I run into once a month.
People want to register vitamins and supplements that have CBD in it.
Technically, anything ingestible, food, drink, supplement, pet products is
technically illegal under federal law if it contains CBD.
Because it violates what's called the FDCA act, the federal Drug and Cosmetics Act.
Right. Now, is that going to eventually change?
Yes, it's eventually going to change, but technically it's illegal.
Now, would you know it's illegal?
Of course not.
You go to the biggest stores in the world,
Walmart, and you can buy supplements with CBD in it.
Right. You can buy drinks with CBD in it.
No one's enforcing this. Zero.
There's zero enforcement, but it's technically illegal.
So you cannot register a trademark for a
supplement or food product or a beverage product that contains CBD.
Now, you can register the same trademark
if it was used in connection with a topical product that contains CBD.
So it's a lotion that contains CBD.
Perfectly legal.
You can register.
I'm going to go tell a buddy of mine he has the only gourmet popcorn with CBD in
it in the United States, to our knowledge, really talking to him about it yesterday.
And I'm going to say, all right,
you may be on the jump of something here, but you can't do anything with it yet.
Yeah. You can't register the trim right now.
What's a way of getting around this?
Well, registering at the state level is a way of getting around it if the product is
legal in the state, another way of getting around it to try to get some initial
protections while the federal laws going to be because eventually, obviously,
marijuana is going to be legal in the federal law.
Cbd. This is all going to be legal eventually.
Right. So one way to kind of do this is to file a
trademark application for the name that you use for your illegal product.
And you register it for something else that is legal that you're providing.
One thing that's very easy to do is start
a YouTube channel under this name and just put out videos about your CBD Popcorn.
And then we're going to register the
trademark for providing online videos in the field of Popcorn.
And then you've now got a trademark
registration for this name for videos in the field of Popcorn.
And then when the law changes,
then you can file a trademark application for that name for Popcorn for CBD Popcorn.
And it's probably going to go through just fine.
It also prevents others from registering a
similar name while we're waiting for the law to change.
Awesome. Okay.
I got some phone calls to make.
Somebody send your way.
You just do something soon, like start a blog about Popcorn.
I mean, literally anything that would be
easy to do, that's legal, that has some relationship to your product.
That's crazy. Yeah.
Start a podcast.
Like literally anything.
Sell some clothing with that name on it.
Got you. Oh, man.
Well, hey, this has been fascinating.
This has been awesome.
And getting me to get corrected in my head between the
differences of some of these things that even now, years later, I'm still confused
on clearly what's the best way for people to reach out?
Connect. You got social media to follow on.
Yeah. You can just look me up.
You just type in Morris Turk on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, TikTok, LinkedIn.
I'm there.
I have one video of me dancing.
It's not pretty, but it's there.
So, yeah, I just recently started TikTok, which is kind of fun.
I'm probably too old for it, but it's fine.
And then obviously you can connect with me by calling me.
My number is 314-749-4059 and my email address is Morris@yourtrademarkete.com.
Awesome. And like I said, as it stands now, you are
number four or five on the Google first page.
All you even have to do is just Google trademark attorney as the keyword.
And you popped up on the first page.
That's good to hear.
I don't check my rankings all that often, but that's good to hear.
I wonder if I'm ranking like that in other
parts of the country, or is it just like in the St.
Louis area? Not sure.
Well, Google's changed some stuff around they front loaded it with ads at the top.
More so than it used to be.
I've noticed it and I've seen other tech guys talk about it as well.
But you're definitely in the organic
searches on page one on the most important keyword probably for your entire business.
Hey, can't complain about that. That's awesome.
Yeah, I appreciate the time. No, it's my pleasure.
Thanks for having me. This has been fun.


text:
Q: Selectively disable subsumption in Scala? (correctly type List.contains) List("a").contains(5)

Because an Int can never be contained in a list of String, this should generate an error at compile-time, but it does not.
It wastefully and silently tests every String contained in the list for equality to 5, which can never be true ("5" never equals 5 in Scala).
This has been named "the 'contains' problem". And some have implied that if a type system cannot correctly type such semantics, then why go through the extra effort for enforcing types. So I consider it is an important problem to solve.
The type parametrization B >: A of List.contains inputs any type that is a supertype of the type A (the type of the elements contained in the list).
trait List[+A] {
   def contains[B >: A](x: B): Boolean
}

This type parametrization is necessary because the +A declares that the list is covariant on the type A, thus A can't be used in the contravariant position, i.e. as the type of an input parameter. Covariant lists (which must be immutable) are much more powerful for extension than invariant lists (which can be mutable).
A is a String in the problematic example above, but Int is not a supertype of String, so what happened? The implicit subsumption in Scala, decided that Any is a mutual supertype of both String and Int.
The creator of Scala, Martin Odersky, suggested that a fix would be to limit the input type B to only those types that have an equals method that Any doesn't have.
trait List[+A] {
   def contains[B >: A : Eq](x: B): Boolean
}

But that doesn't solve the problem, because two types (where the input type is not supertype of the type of the elements of the list) might have a mutual supertype which is a subtype of Any, i.e. also a subtype of Eq. Thus, it would compile without error and the incorrectly typed semantics would remain.
Disabling implicit subsumption every where is not an ideal solution either, because implicit subsumption is why the following example for subsumption to Any works. And we wouldn't want to be forced to use type casts when the receiving site (e.g. passing as a function argument) has correctly typed semantics for a mutual supertype (that might not even be Any).
trait List[+A] {
   def ::[B >: A](x: B): List[B]
}

val x : List[Any] = List("a", 5) // see[1]

[1] List.apply calls the :: operator.
So my question is what is the best fix to this problem?
My tentative conclusion is that implicit subsumption should be turned off at the definition site where the semantics are otherwise not typed correctly. I will be providing an answer that shows how to turn off implicit subsumption at the method definition site. Are there alternative solutions?
Please note this problem is general, and not isolated to lists.
UPDATE: I have filed an improvement request and started a scala discussion thread on this. I have also added comments under Kim Stebel's and Peter Schmitz's answers showing that their answers have erroneous functionality. Thus there is no solution. Also at the aforementioned discussion thread, I explained why I think soc's answer is not correct.

A: Why not use an equality typeclass?
scala> val l = List(1,2,3)
l: List[Int] = List(1, 2, 3)

scala> class EQ[A](a1:A) { def ===(a2:A) = a1 == a2 }
defined class EQ

scala> implicit def toEQ[A](a1:A) = new EQ(a1)
toEQ: [A](a1: A)EQ[A]

scala> l exists (1===)
res7: Boolean = true

scala> l exists ("1"===)
<console>:14: error: type mismatch;
 found   : java.lang.String => Boolean
 required: Int => Boolean
              l exists ("1"===)
                           ^

scala> List("1","2")
res9: List[java.lang.String] = List(1, 2)

scala> res9 exists (1===)
<console>:14: error: type mismatch;
 found   : Int => Boolean
 required: java.lang.String => Boolean
              res9 exists (1===)

A: I think you misunderstand Martin's solution, it is not B <: Eq, it is B : Eq, which is a shortcut for
def Contains[B >: A](x: B)(implicit ev: Eq[B])

And Eq[X] would then contains a method
def areEqual(a: X, b: X): Boolean

This is not the same as moving the equals method of Any a little lower in the hierarchy, which would indeed solve none of the problem of having it in Any.

A: In my library extension I use:
class TypesafeEquals[A](val a: A) {
  def =*=(x: A): Boolean = a == x
  def =!=(x: A): Boolean = a != x
}
implicit def any2TypesafeEquals[A](a: A) = new TypesafeEquals(a)

class RichSeq[A](val seq: Seq[A]) {
  ...
  def containsSafely(a: A): Boolean = seq exists (a =*=)
  ...
}
implicit def seq2RichSeq[A](s: Seq[A]) = new RichSeq(s)

So I avoid calling contains.

A: The examples use L instead of List or SeqLike, because for this solution to be applied to preexisting contains method of those collections, it would require a change to the preexisting library code. One of the goals is the best way to do equality, not the best compromise to interopt with the current libraries (although backwards compatibility needs to be considered). Additionally, my other goal is this answer is generally applicable for any method function that wants to selectively disable the implicit subsumption feature of the Scala compiler for any reason, not necessarily tied to the equality semantics.
case class L[+A]( elem: A )
{
   def contains[B](x: B)(implicit ev: A <:< B) = elem == x
}

The above generates an error as desired, assuming the desired semantics for List.contains is the input should be equal to and a supertype of the contained element.
L("a").contains(5)
error: could not find implicit value for parameter ev: <:<[java.lang.String,Int]
       L("a").contains(5)
                      ^

The error is not generated when implicit subsumption was not required.
scala> L("a").contains(5 : Any)
defined class L

scala> L("a").contains("")
defined class L

This disables the implicit subsumption (selectively at the method definition site), by requiring the input parameter type B to be the same as the argument type passed as input (i.e. not implicitly subsumable with A), and then separately require implicit evidence that B is a, or has an implicitly subsumable, supertype of A.]

UPDATE May 03, 2012: The code above is not complete, as is shown below that turning off all subsumption at the method definition-site does not give the desired result.
class Super
defined class Super
class Sub extends Super
defined class Sub

L(new Sub).contains(new Super)
defined class L

L(new Super).contains(new Sub)
error: could not find implicit value for parameter ev: <:<[Super,Sub]
       L(new Super).contains(new Sub)
                            ^

The only way to get the desired form of subsumption, is to also cast at the method (call) use-site.
L(new Sub).contains(new Super : Sub)
error: type mismatch;
 found   : Super
 required: Sub
       L(new Sub).contains(new Super : Sub)
                           ^

L(new Super).contains(new Sub : Super)
defined class L

Per soc's answer, the current semantics for List.contains is that the input should be equal to, but not necessarily a supertype of the contained element. This assumes List.contains promises any matched item only equals and is not required to be a (subtype or) copy of an instance of the input. The current universal equality interface Any.equals : Any => Boolean is unityped, so equality doesn't enforce a subtyping relationship. If this is the desired semantics for List.contains, subtyping relationships can't be employed to optimize the compile-time semantics, e.g. disabling implicit subsumption, and we are stuck with the potential semantic inefficiencies that degrade runtime performance for List.contains.
While I will be studying and thinking more about equality and contains, afaics my answer remains valid for the general purpose of selectively disabling implicit subsumption at the method definition site.
My thought process is also ongoing holistically w.r.t. the best model of equality.

Update: I added a comment below soc's answer, so I now think his point is not relevant. Equality should always be based on a subtyped relationship, which afaics is what Martin Odersky is proposing for the new equality overhaul (see also his version of contains). Any ad-hoc polymorphic equivalence (e.g. BitInt(1) == 1) can be handled with implicit conversions.  I explained in my comment below didierd's answer that without my improvement below, afaics Martin's proposed contains would have a semantic error, whereby a mutual implicitly subsumed supertype (other than Any) will select the wrong implicit instance of Eq (if one exists, else unnecessary compiler error). My solution disables the implicit subsumption for this method, which is the correct semantics for the subtyped argument of Eq.eq.
trait Eq[A]
{
   def eq(x: A, y: A) = x == y
}

implicit object EqInt extends Eq[Int]
implicit object EqString extends Eq[String]

case class L[+A]( elem: A )
{
   def contains[B](x: B)(implicit ev: A <:< B, eq: Eq[B]) = eq.eq(x, elem)
}
L("a").contains("")

Note Eq.eq can be optionally replaced by the implicit object (not overridden because there is no virtual inheritance, see below).
Note that as desired, L("a").contains(5 : Any) no longer compiles, because Any.equals is no longer used.
We can abbreviate.
case class L[+A]( elem: A )
{
   def contains[B : Eq](x: B)(implicit ev: A <:< B) = eq.eq(x, elem)
}

Add: The x == y must be a virtual inheritance call, i.e. x.== should be declared override, because there is no virtual inheritance in the Eq typeclass. The type parameter A is invariant (because A is used in the contravariant position as input parameter of Eq.eg). Then we can define an implicit object on an interface (a.k.a. trait).
Thus, the Any.equals override must still check if the concrete type of the input matches. That overhead can't be removed by the compiler.

A: I think I have a legitimate solution to at least some of the problem posted here - I mean, the issue with List("1").contains(1):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sC42GKY7WvztXzgWPGDqFukZ0smZFmNnQksD_lJzm20/edit

A: This sounds good in theory, but falls apart in real life in my opinion.
equals is not based on types and contains is building on top of that.
That's why code like 1 == BigInt(1) works and returns the result most people would expect.
In my opinion it doesn't make sense to make contains more strict than equals.
If contains would be made more strict, code like List[BigInt](1,2,3) contains 1 would stop working completely.
I don't think "unsafe" or "not type safe" are the right terms here, by the way.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Swiftopecten swiftii — вид двостулкових молюсків родини гребінцевих (Pectinidae).

Поширення
Вид поширений у Японському морі біля узбережжя Японії та російського острова Сахалін. Трапляється на глибині 2-46 м на твердому морському дні.

Опис
Мушля завдовжки до 10,5, завширшки до 9,5 см. Форма мушлі округло-трикутна, її нижня стулка плоскіша, ніж верхня. На обох стулках є по 5 широких радіальних складок. На раковині добре видно річні зони росту, числом до шести. Колір мушлі дорослого молюска фіолетовий, нижня стулка блідіша верхньої, інколи майже біла. Молоді особини можуть бути помаранчевими або рожевими з білими плямами і смугами.

Примітки

Гребінцеві
Тварини, описані 1858
Біота Японського моря
Фауна Японії

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Caughtoffside | Football Transfer Rumours, News And Gossip From The English Premier League And Beyond
http://www.caughtoffside.com
Chelsea coach wants Arsenal's defensive star at Stamford Bridge
Tags: stamford bridge club champions league defensive star league chelsea coach hiddink bridge stamford west london
Speaking to the Dutch media, Chelsea's interim coach Guus Hiddink has insisted that he wants to see Arsenal's Petr Cech back at Stamford Bridge.
The manager—in an interview with Fox Sports in the Netherlands—has discussed his new role as an advisor at the Club, and outlined how he'd like to see former club legends brought back to the club in off-field roles.
Witnessing an Aggressive Event
Home Workouts for Weight Loss
How many days do you need for London?
The Best Passive Income Streams
Body Positive Fat And Sexy
Specifically, Hiddink has insisted that Montreal Impact attacker Didier Drogba and Arsenal stopper Cech are two figures he'd love to see back in West London in the future.
"They have had a great impact here," Hiddink began. "Once they are really finished with their playing careers, they can be of great value to the club, as an assistant or scout."
The club do already have some of their former players on the staff, with Eddie Newton—who represented the Pensioners for nine years between 1990 and 1999 after coming through the ranks—currently one of two assistant managers at the club.
Drogba is one of the Blues' all-time greats, having played a pivotal role in their Champions League triumph of 2012.
Chelsea set for unexpected managerial u-turn as Hiddink confirms he's staying
Cech holds similarly iconic status in West London, having joined from Stade Rennais in 2004.
He would enjoy 11 years as a player at Stamford Bridge, winning four Premier League titles, four FA Cups, the Champions League and the Europa League, before leaving for Arsenal last summer.
Follow EPL Expert on Twitter
The post Chelsea Coach wants Arsenal's Defensive Star at Stamford Bridge appeared first on CaughtOffside.
This post first appeared on CaughtOffside | Football Transfer Rumours, News And Gossip From The English Premier League And Beyond, please read the originial post: here
Best 10 Food Delivery Apps to Satisfy Your Hunger
MRS THATCHER'S DREAM
Hollywood Dentist Providing Red Carpet Smiles
Flannel Pajamas Sets Winter Home Clothes For Women Men Sleepwear Couple
Subscribe to Caughtoffside | Football Transfer Rumours, News And Gossip From The English Premier League And Beyond

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Stem Cell Research Facilities Expanding at UCSD
Karl Willert will direct the Human Stem Cell Core Facility at UC San Diego.
San Diego, CA, June 5, 2007 -- The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Human Stem Cell Core Facility, which supports multiple research projects using stem cells to advance the understanding and ultimately the treatment of disease and injury, will receive a $2.8 million Shared Research Laboratory Grant from the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). The funding will be used to upgrade the current core facility, and to support the establishment of a new satellite facility to expand the resources available to investigators.
"The support provided by this grant will allow UCSD to enhance our collaborative stem cell program so that we may accelerate our goals of improving health and conquering disease through regenerative medicine," said Marye Anne Fox, UCSD Chancellor.
The core facility, directed by Karl Willert, is integral to UC San Diego's broad-based efforts in stem cell research, also called "regenerative medicine" due to the unique property of stem cells to regenerate into specific cell types that potentially could be used to repair and replace tissue damaged by disease or injury. The facility provides a specially equipped, centralized location for the maintenance of a number of established human embryonic stem cell lines, the training of scientists in basic techniques to work with these cells, and for dedicated laboratory space, technology and support for research utilizing stem cells.
In this image of human embryonic stem cells, microtubules of the cytoskeleton appear as red lines. The blue ovals are cell nuclei and the green markers indicate the presence of a protein expressed only in human embryonic stem cells.
Higher-resolution version.
Credit: Samantha Zeitlin, 2006 CIRM fellow
A portion of the funding will be used to purchase new equipment and upgrade the existing core facility laboratory, which is utilized by a growing number of investigators from a variety of disciplines. Research projects underway at UCSD include the potential use of stem cells in the treatment of cancer, Alzheimer's and Huntington's disease, and spinal cord repair, and other diseases that today are considered incurable.
The grant will also support the creation of a new 2,775 square-foot satellite core facility to be located in UCSD's Jacobs School of Engineering. The laboratory will build on the research and expertise of faculty from Bioengineering and other departments in the Jacobs School, and from the Division of Physical Sciences. Faculty researchers in these departments include experts in new technologies such as nanotechnology, biomaterials, instrumentation, bioreactors and tissue engineering, all key to the stem cell research effort.
"This new core laboratory will apply an array of the most promising technologies in the world for controlling stem cell differentiation, delivering stem-cell based therapies, scaling up cell production, and engineering replacement tissues," said Andrew McCulloch, chair of the Department of Bioengineering. "This one-of-a-kind research laboratory also is attracting highly talented new faculty to UCSD to work on discoveries that we hope will improve the health of people in California, the country, and the world."
In addition to the opportunity to renovate and purchase state-of-the-art equipment for the current facility, Willert noted that the development of the new satellite facility will enable development of promising new materials by a whole different arm of the science, taking full advantage of the broad scope of expertise at UCSD. "The contribution of bioengineers and chemists will be key in the development of innovative new technologies that will drive the future growth and translation of stem cell science," he said.
The UCSD project was one of 17 Shared Research Laboratories grants announced today by the 28-member Independent Citizens Oversight Committee, governing board of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine. The committee approved grants totaling approximately $50 million to researchers at academic and non-profit research centers throughout the state. The grants – selected from among 22 applications from California institutions – are designed to fund dedicated laboratory space for the culture and maintenance of hESC lines, in particular lines that fall outside of the federal research guidelines and therefore ineligible for support from the National Institutes of Health.
Debra Kain
UCSD School of Medicine
ddkain@ucsd.edu
California Institute for Regenerative Medicine
Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee
UCSD Stem Cell Initiative
Stem Cell Image Gallery


We are experienced, we enjoy the work we do and we can tell you things about Office that will make you speechless. Over the years, we have learnt how to make Office do what we need, not what it wants to do. All those annoying things that people get upset about, tamed.
Most people don't have the formal training they probably need, so fully-branded templates need to take this into account. Having a representative of Operandi in the briefing stage is likely to eliminate a long list of misunderstandings and poor assumptions. We are just as happy to say we are from your company as we are coming from ours. Ultimately, it's about getting the job done.


The Pro Bono Partnership announced that it has raised $1.7 million to date to provide free business legal assistance to hundreds of nonprofit organizations in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut through its Gala being held on October 16, at Cipriani 42nd Street in Manhattan. For a second consecutive year, the Gala is sold-out.
Cynthia McFadden, co-anchor of Nightline at ABC News, will host the event. The Gala's Honorees are H. Rodgin Cohen, senior chairman, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, and Larry Thompson, executive vice president, Government Affairs, general counsel & corporate secretary, PepsiCo, who will each be presented with the Pro Bono Partnership Champion Award in recognition of their service to the community and outstanding commitment to the provision of pro bono legal services. Stephen M. Cutler, executive vice president & general counsel, JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Indra K. Nooyi, chairman & chief executive officer, PepsiCo, are dinner chairs and presenters.
The Partnership, itself a nonprofit, provides free business legal advice to other nonprofit organizations that feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, promote the arts, protect the environment and provide essential programs to children, adults and families. It leverages its legal staff by mobilizing the pro bono services of approximately 900 attorneys from major corporations and law firms throughout the tri-state area each year. These attorneys, who volunteer their services to the Partnership's clients, help nonprofits operate their programs more efficiently, while allowing them to preserve their limited resources for programs that improve their communities. The Partnership provides nearly all its services without charge and will use the proceeds of the Gala to support its programs.


text:
Tag Archives: Jack Devereaux
Daytime Emmy Award Interviews: Kassie DePaiva of "Days of our Lives"
The Buzz had the chance to attend the 46th Annual Daytime Emmy Awards, including the nominee reception and Creative Arts ceremonies. This year, we once again chatted with incredible daytime talent on both television and digital media. Kassie DePaiva plays the role of Eve Donovan on,"Days of our Lives." The actress spoke with us about…
May 15, 2019 in Buzzcast, BuzzWorthy Promotions, Commentary, Daytime Emmys, Entertainment Buzz, Industry Buzz, Interviews, Soaps, Stations, Television Buzz, Television Series, Videos.
Daytime Emmy Creative Arts Interviews: Matthew Ashford of "The Bay the Series" and "Days of our Lives"
The Daytime Creative Arts Emmy Awards were held at the Westin Bonaventure in Los Angeles, CA, and honored the excellence on daytime television programming from those behind the scenes. From make up artists, casting directors, and music composers, this is a night where they got to shine. Also, the creative teams on court legal shows,…
May 17, 2016 in Buzzcast, BuzzWorthy Promotions, Commentary, Daytime Emmys, Entertainment Buzz, Industry Buzz, Interviews, Soaps, Stations, Television Buzz, Television Series.
WATCH: Confessions of Bay City Featuring Steve Jensen (MATTHEW ASHFORD)
As "The Bay the Series" is set to make a May return with a new chapter, which promises to be more sexier, steamier, edgier, and more passionate, "Confessions of Bay City" kicked off their series today with character Steve Jensen. Jensen is played by daytime favorite Matthew Ashford (ex-Jack Devereaux, "Days of our Lives"). In…
March 13, 2014 in BuzzWorthy Promotions, Entertainment Buzz, Industry Buzz, Soaps, Stations.


Click the button below to receive our eNews and/or mailed newsletters.
We respect your privacy and will not share or sell your contact information.
Check out photos of your CBFAR friends at the General Assembly by clicking here.
Please click here for all the news, blogs, photos, and videos from the CBF General Assembly.
Also, you can read our recent eNews that includes information about the General Assembly.
If you are looking for a daily devotional moment, check out this devotional provided by CBF Partner, Passport.


text:
package nl.wur.ssb.RDF2GraphViewer.internal;

import java.awt.event.ActionEvent;

import org.cytoscape.app.CyAppAdapter;
import org.cytoscape.application.swing.AbstractCyAction;

public class MenuAction extends AbstractCyAction
{
	private static final long serialVersionUID = 4728624762049707677L;
	private RDF2GraphViewer master;
	private boolean includeSubClasses, showSimple, showNonSimple;

	public MenuAction(CyAppAdapter adapter, RDF2GraphViewer master,String menu,String name,boolean includeSubClasses,boolean showSimple,boolean showNonSimple)
	{
		super(name,adapter.getCyApplicationManager(),"network",adapter.getCyNetworkViewManager());
		this.master = master;
		this.includeSubClasses = includeSubClasses;
		this.showSimple = showSimple;
		this.showNonSimple = showNonSimple;
		setPreferredMenu(menu);
	}

	public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e)
	{
		this.master.selectShowPropos(this.includeSubClasses,this.showSimple,this.showNonSimple);
	}
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Joey Will Have a Wife + Kids When 'Fuller House' Returns, Mr. Woodchuck Weeps
Matthew Scott Donnelly
Emma McIntyre, Getty Images
Joey Gladstone's personal life will no longer be left up to the imagination of Fuller House viewers next season — there will, in fact, be a Mrs. Gladstone. And four kids!
According to TVLine, Dave Coulier's character, who was single through most of origin series Full House, will bring his family to San Francisco for Fuller House Season 2's Thanksgiving episode. Joey's wife, Ginger, is an "enthusiastic, upbeat, fun-loving magician" who's "a little clueless in the parenting department."
The Fuller House team originally planned to introduce her in Season 1, she didn't quite fit at the get-go.
"It didn't make it into the script, but at one point, we had him with a wife and kids back in Vegas," Fuller House creator Jeff Franklin said.
Executive Producer Bob Boyett added that a 13-episode season can limit the number of story lines writers can address.
"It just didn't fit anywhere in the stories we developed," he said. "We had Joey — in the stories we were using him — come in for specific reasons. We just haven't gotten to everything yet."
And Coulier's own love story was pretty recently introduced to the Fuller House cast — in July 2014, Candace Cameron Bure, Andrea Barber and more of the show's stars watched the actor marry photographer Melissa Bring in a rural Montana ceremony. Bure told People Bob Saget was slated to deliver a toast, and warned, "I can only imagine what will come out of his mouth."
Happy to hear Joey's love story will finally get fleshed out on Fuller House? Tell us who you think would be perfect for the role of Ginger.
Check Out a Collection of Favorite TV and Movie Casts Reunited:
Next: DJ's Love-Triangle Will Continue in 'Fuller House' Season 2
Source: Joey Will Have a Wife + Kids When 'Fuller House' Returns, Mr. Woodchuck Weeps
Filed Under: dave coulier, fuller house
Categories: Entertainment, News


I am so late with posting some of these. I am sorry about that. I never seem to catch up with emails.
I haven't seen that blog tag going around for a while. Thank you!
I could name so many more bloggers who have become dear cyber friends of mine.
Catherine Martinez and Leah Logan gave me the Make My Day Award.
I could have posted my entire blog roll for these awards. There are so many amazing stamper out there.
Thank you to everyone who nominated me (I sure hope I didn't forget someone).
You can be pretty sure that nobody will notice if you skip some scrubbing! A little YOU time is more important!
Thanks Beate…that means a lot coming from the queen!
skip the cleaning and do the stamping!!!!
Hi there- you forgot me- I awarded you with the Art de pico award also- because if anyone deserves it- you do- I am glad you finally posted all your awards!
You deserve each and every one, and then some! TFS.
Congrats Beate – I am still chuckling over Corinne – that girl is a hoot!!! You know I love your blog, and you totally deserve these awards! Take some me time today, you deserve it!
Is Rick home for good now or does he have to go back?
Wow! Thanks for nominating me Beate! What a special thing coming from you!
Hey, I heard on the radio this morning that this is National No Housecleaning Day! LOL!
Get out girl! lol! Thanks so much! I haven't seen that Rocking Girl Blogger tag in so long…it's nice to see it going around again!
Congratulations on all of your awards, Beate!! You are definitely deserving!! Thanks for awarding me the "Make my Day" award!! It really means a lot to hear this from you, 'cause you make my day too!!
I'm speechless:) Thanks so much for thinking about me. You truly deserve every award for your continued efforts to inspire.


Alvas.Controls (Windows.Forms) is a collection of 100% native CLR compliant controls written in C#.
- 100% native .NET framework managed components written in C#.
- Controls can change their size at runtime.
- Controls can be dragable at runtime.
1. Bevel is a decoration control.
2. CaptionCheckedListBox represents CheckedListBox with caption.
3. CaptionComboBox represents ComboBox with caption.
4. CaptionDataGrid represents DataGrid with caption.
5. CaptionDateTimePicker represents DateTimePicker with caption.
6. CaptionDomainUpDown represents DomainUpDown with caption.
7. CaptionGroupBox represents GroupBox with caption.
8. CaptionListBox represents ListBox with caption.
9. CaptionListView represents ListView with caption.
10. CaptionMonthCalendar represents MonthCalendar with caption.
11. CaptionNumericUpDown represents NumericUpDown with caption.
12. CaptionPanel represents Panel with caption.
13. CaptionPictureBox represents PictureBox with caption.
14. CaptionPrintPreviewControl represents PrintPreviewControl with caption.
15. CaptionRichTextBox represents RichTextBox with caption.
16. CaptionTextBox represents TextBox with caption.
17. CaptionTreeView represents TreeView with caption.
18. GradientControl represents control with gradient fill.
19. SystemIcon is control which represents standard icons.


text:
La cueva de Aroeira es una cueva y yacimiento arqueológico ubicado en Almonda, municipio de Torres Novas, centro de Portugal, donde se han encontrado herramientas de piedra, huesos fósiles de especímenes de Homo preneandertales y rastros de manejo del fuego.

Yacimiento arqueológico y paleontológico
Las investigaciones y excavaciones en curso desde 1987, en el conjunto de localidades paleoantropológicas en Almonda, han producido restos humanos y ricos niveles arqueológicos del Paleolítico Inferior, Medio y Superior así como el Neolítico temprano y los períodos prehistóricos posteriores. Dentro del sistema kárstico de Almonda, la Gruta da Aroeira fue investigada por primera vez entre 1998 y 2002, cuando se revelaron un gran número de bifaces Achelenses asociadas a restos de fauna y dos dientes humanos, Aroeira 1 y 2, relativamente grandes comparados con referencias contemporáneas como la Sima de los Huesos.

La cueva tiene una estratigrafía de unos 4 m de espesor, con tres unidades principales. El cráneo Aroeira 3 fue descubierto en la unidad 2, de unos 2 m de espesor, que también incluye herramientas Acheulenses. Un total de 387 herramientas de piedra fueron descubiertas, incluyendo 17 de dos caras, 27 herramientas con trazas de retoque, 43 núcleos, y 180 chips y escombros, y finalmente 114 residuos, algunos de los cuales pueden haber sido aportado desde el exterior durante las excavaciones. El cuarzo es el material preferido, el pedernal es raro.

Los restos de la fauna están muy fragmentados. Hay dientes aislados, falanges, huesos de carpa y tarso y fragmentos de madera. En total, fueron hallados 209: 58 de venados, y 46 équidos. Se encontraron dos fragmentos de Rhinocerotidae, tanto Stephanorhinus como Hundsheimensis, así como cuatro osos, un bóvido grande (bisonte), un caprino y una tortuga (Testudo). Algunos están calcinados en la base de la capa 2 y en asociación con herramientas de piedra y el cráneo.

Cráneo Aroeira 3
El cráneo de Aroeira 3 muestra varios rasgos característicos de los cráneos europeos del Pleistoceno medio anterior. Sin embargo, la combinación de rasgos en el cráneo Aroeira 3 no se ve en ningún otro individuo.

Una característica común de Aroeira 3 con los neandertales es la forma general del cráneo. Después de la captura de la muestra por tomografía axial computarizada, la parte derecha bien conservada de Aroeira 3 puede ser reflejada para simular el lado izquierdo y para apreciar la forma total. De esta manera se observa la orientación vertical de los parietales, muy diferente del tipo ancestral de Homo erectus, donde convergen fuertemente hacia arriba. En vista posterior, esta orientación vertical da una apariencia bastante circular al cráneo, opuesta al aspecto pentagonal marcado en Homo erectus.

Una de las principales características de los europeos del Pleistoceno medio es la aparición del torus supraorbitario. En Steinheim, Petralona, Bilzingsleben y Sima de los Huesos, como también en los neandertales del Pleistoceno inferior, los arcos supraorbitarios son curvados mediolateralmente (en vista frontal) y redondeados en su superficie anterior. Los dos arcos pueden fundirse completamente en una hinchada región glabelar, o pueden permanecer más o menos separados en el plano medio por una depresión glabelar. Esta morfología supraorbitaria, con diferentes grados de fusión glabelar. También es el caso, antes en el Pleistoceno, del espécimen ATD6-15 de la Gran Dolina. Estos rasgos se combinan con una eminencia articular sobreelevada, que contrasta con la eminencia articular más plana que es una característica que aparece muy temprano en la evolución neandertal. Sin embargo, en Arago y el hombre de Ceprano, esta característica está más cerca de especímenes africanos como los de Kabwe y Bodo, donde los arcos están separados, más planos y menos curvos. Aunque la morfología exacta de los arcos es difícil de reconstruir para Aroeira 3, parecen estar fusionadas alrededor de un hueso frontal hinchado. El lado derecho conservado muestra un redondeado, acercándose al espécimen de Bilzingsleben B1, más que los demás. A pesar de la abrasión, se observa generalmente que el torus es grueso, en comparación con el resto de los individuos pleistocénicos, bastante cerca de Bodo y Ceprano, pero menos gruesa que B1. El pilar interorbital es ancho. Esta combinación de rasgos en el cráneo Aroeira 3 aumenta la diversidad previamente documentada en el registro fósil del pleistoceno medio europeo.

Varias muestras de unidades litoestratigráficas han sido analizadas por el método Urano-Torio y proporcionan una cronología coherente. Primero, una estalagmita fue enterrada debajo de los sedimentos, por lo que su formación es anterior a ella. La datación de su superficie arrojó 406 ± 30 ka, limita la edad de las siguientes capas a las que pertenece el cráneo. El techo sedimentario de la cueva le proporciona una edad mínima, y está fechado a 418 ka. La edad del cráneo está entonces entre 390 y 436 mil años.

Bibliografía

 Daura, J., Sanz, M., Arsuaga, J.L.J.L., Hoffmann, D.L.D.L., Quam, R.M.R.M., Ortega, M.C.M.C., Santos, E., Gómez, S., Rubio, A., Villaescusa, L., Souto, P., Mauricio, J., Rodrigues, F., Ferreira, A., Godinho, P., Trinkaus, E., Zilhão, J., 2017c. New Middle Pleistocene hominin cranium from Gruta da Aroeira (Portugal). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 3397–3402. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1619040114
 Daura, J., Sanz, M., Deschamps, M., Matias, H., Igreja, M., Villaescusa, L., Gómez, S., Rubio, A., Souto, P., Rodrigues, F., Zilhão, J., 2018. A 400,000-year-old Acheulean assemblage associated with the Aroeira-3 human cranium (Gruta da Aroeira, Almonda karst system, Portugal). Comptes Rendus Palevol 17, 594–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crpv.2018.03.003
 Sanz, M., Sala, N., Daura, J., Pantoja-Pérez, A., Santos, E., Zilhão, J., Arsuaga, J.L., 2018. Taphonomic inferences about Middle Pleistocene hominins: The human cranium of Gruta da Aroeira (Portugal). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 167, 615–627. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23689
 Sanz, M., Daura, J., Cabanes, D., Égüez, N., Carrancho, Á., Badal, E., Souto, P., Rodrigues, F., Zilhão, J., 2020. Early evidence of fire in south-western Europe: the Acheulean site of Gruta da Aroeira (Torres Novas, Portugal). Scientific Reports 10, 12053. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68839-w

Referencias

Yacimientos arqueológicos de Portugal
Yacimientos paleontológicos de Europa
Torres Novas


text:
Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) "Where's Johnny?" St. Croix Polo
Item # SCG0014
NEW FEATURED ITEM
SALE PRICE: $1250 $950.00
This white vertically embroidered knit short sleeve shirt by St. Croix was worn by the character Tony Soprano played by actor James Gandolfini in H.B.O.'s award winning series "The Sopranos". Mr. Gandolfini wore the shirt in "Where's Johnny?" (Season 5, Episode 3) during the opening sequence inside Bada Bing where Tony Soprano talks with Tony Blundetto about the night of the hijacking that sent Tony B to prison for fifteen years. Also worn in "All Happy Families" (Season 5, Episode 4) during the scene where the Sopranos crew discusses Little Carmine and Johnny Sack's rivalry in the office of the Crazy Horse.
This garment is part of Mr. Gandolfini's personal collection of Tony Soprano wardrobe that he acquired after the Sopranos series ended. Accompanied by a COA from the costume house.
THE SOPRANOS - Tony Blundetto (Steve Buscemi) "Long Term Parking" Cole Han Leather Jacket
THE SOPRANOS - Paulie Walnuts (Tony Sirico) "Stage 5" Knit Shirt
THE SOPRANOS - Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) "Mr. & Mrs. John Sacrimoni Request" Gold Silk Brioni
THE SOPRANOS - Paulie "Walnuts" Gualtieri (Tony Sirico) "Made in America" Burgundy Velour Tracksuit