Better Made vs. Cannabis Companies: A Michigan Trademark Dispute
Summary
Better Made, is embroiled in a legal battle with over a dozen cannabis businesses in the state. The lawsuit, filed in March 2024, centers on allegations of trademark infringement. Better Made claims a cannabis brand named “Better Smoke” is using a logo confusingly similar to their own, potentially misleading consumers and damaging their brand reputation.
Trademark Infringement Claims
Better Made asserts that the “Better Smoke” logo replicates key elements of their established trademark. This includes a similar design layout and potentially the use of a similar color scheme. The lawsuit argues that this similarity is likely to cause consumer confusion, leading people to believe the cannabis products are somehow affiliated with Better Made potato chips.
Protecting Brand Identity
The core of Better Made’s case rests on the concept of trademark infringement. Trademarks are symbols or designs that identify a specific source of goods or services. By establishing a trademark, companies gain legal protection against others using confusingly similar marks that could mislead consumers.
Dangers of Dilution
Beyond simply avoiding confusion, Better Made also claims trademark dilution. This legal concept protects against uses that weaken the distinctiveness of a brand, even if there’s no immediate confusion. In this case, Better Made argues that the “Better Smoke” brand chips away at the unique identity they’ve built for their own products.
Legal Repercussions
Better Made seeks both monetary damages and an injunction. An injunction is a court order prohibiting the defendants from using the allegedly infringing logo. If successful, this could force the “Better Smoke” brand to redesign its packaging and marketing materials.
The Road Ahead
The outcome of this lawsuit will be closely watched by businesses in both the food and cannabis industries. A win for Better Made could set a precedent for how established brands can protect themselves from potential confusion caused by cannabis businesses using similar names or logos.
Real Questions from Real Calls
Question: I smoked several joints and consumed too many marijuana edibles at a concert in the park. Is that legal??
Answer: If it was not a state licensed consumption event the answer is no. It is unlawful to smoke marijuana in public places. The Gov needs to get their cut.
333.27954 Scope of act; unauthorized activities with marihuana and marihuana accessories; limitations; application of privileges, rights, immunities, and defenses under other marihuana laws; employer rights; property owner rights.
Sec. 4. 1. This act does not authorize:
(e) consuming marihuana in a public place or smoking marihuana where prohibited by the person who owns, occupies, or manages the property, except for purposes of this subdivision a public place does not include an area designated for consumption within a municipality that has authorized consumption in designated areas that are not accessible to persons under 21 years of age;
Read the Law
https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-Initiated-Law-1-of-2018.pdf
Related Articles
CRA Executive Director Hanna Applauds Whitmer’s FY25 Budget
No Evidence of Widespread Discriminatory Policing PracticesNever Ending Quest February 15, 2024 LANSING, MI – Today, Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA) Executive Director Brian Hanna applauded Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Executive Budget...
Cannabis Tax Payments Being Distributed in Michigan
Adult-Use Marijuana Tax Payments Being Distributed In MichiganHere's what they say...Treasury: Adult-Use Marijuana Payments Being Distributed to Michigan Municipalities and Counties; More Than $59.5 Million Going to 224 Municipalities and Counties. Sales of "legal"...
Judge tosses lawsuits stemming from Michigan’s marijuana recall
Judge tosses lawsuits stemming from Michigan’s marijuana recall LANSING, MI -- A Michigan Court of Claims judge on Jan. 2 dismissed two lawsuits linked to Michigan’s enormous 64,000-pound, $229 million 2021 marijuana recall that impacted an estimated 60% of all...
Decision holding mandatory life without parole unconstitutional
COA 352569 PEOPLE OF MI V JOHN ANTONIO POOLE Opinion People v Poole (Docket No. 352569) decided January 18, 2024 The State Appellate Defender Office celebrates today’s outcome for our client John Antonio Poole. As an 18-year-old child, Mr. Poole was sentenced to life...
More Posts
The MSP and Your Privacy (Criminal History)
Is the Michigan State Police really concerned about your criminal history privacy?Here's what they...
Michigan DNA Collection – The Law
Chapter 750Act 328 of 1931328-1931-LXXVI THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)Act 328 of 1931Here's...
The 6th Amendment – Do You Know What It Is?
The 6th Amendment: is it still a thing?The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution is a...
The US Supreme Court and Federal Gun Law Cases
The US Supreme Court and Federal Gun Law CasesChallenges to Federal Gun Laws the right of the...
Do Passengers in a Vehicle have 4th Amendment Rights?
Do Passengers have 4th Amendment Rights?Michigan Supreme Court Limits Police Ability to Search...
Michigan Appeals Court Decision on Cannabis Use and Probation
Michigan Court of Appeals - Recreational Cannabis Use and ProbationRecently, another pivotal...
Do Students Have 4th Amendment Rights in Schools
Students and 4th Amendment RightsStudents are entitled to a right to be safe from unreasonable...
Forfeiture Law: SCOTUS and Sixth Circuit Issue Landmark Rulings
Forfeiture Law in Focus: SCOTUS and Sixth Circuit Issue Landmark RulingsThe landscape of...
When Can Your Silence Be Used Against You in a Legal Situation?
US Supreme Court - Salinas v. TexasWhen Can Silence Be Used Against You? In the realm of criminal...
Supreme Court 8-1 Gun Possession Decision Changes Second Amendment
Supreme Court 8-1 Gun Possession Decision Changes Second Amendment Landscape Forever!Issue:...