Flat-fee copyright registration by a copyright attorney ¦ Trademark registration by a trademark attorney ¦ Licensing, claims, appeals ¦ E-Commerce Law
Tom James Law Office Attorney Thomas James
The Tom James Law Office in Cokato, Minnesota is attorney Thomas James. He is committed to helping creatives and small businesses. Writers, artists, photographers, musicians, designers, programmers, producers. As both a copyright and a trademark attorney Thomas James can help you to register a copyright, a trademark, or both. In addition to registering a copyright or trademark, attorney Thomas James can also help you challenge or protect one.
Quality legal services. No catch.
Copyright registration
Flat-fee copyright registration by a copyright attorney
DMCA compliance
For website owners and content creators
Copyright claims
Cancellations, appeals, licensing and infringement claims
Trademark registration
Low-cost registration with the USPTO by a trademark attorney
Trademark maintenance
Registration renewals, including Section 8 and 15 filings
Trademark claims
Opposition and cancellation proceedings, licensing and infringement claims
Cokato attorney Tom James has over 25 years of experience
A graduate of the University of California at Berkeley and Southwestern University, Thomas B. James has been practicing law for over 20 years. Cokato attorney Tom James has successfully registered both copyrights and trademarks for clients and has represented clients in a variety of matters. He is admitted to practice in the Federal and Eighth Circuit Courts of Appeals, Minnesota courts, and the U.S. Trademark Trials and Appeals Board. Although he is a small town attorney Thomas James is admitted to practice in the United States Supreme Court.
In addition to practicing law, attorney Thomas James has written extensively on e-commerce law and intellectual property law. His articles appear, for example, in such places as:
- Illinois Law Review
- Mitchell-Hamline Journal of Public Policy and Practice
- Nebraska Law Review,
- Minnesota Bench & Bar
- Tax Notes
- Podiatry Management
- University of Maryland Law Journal of Race Religion Gender and Class
- AllBusiness.com
- Avvo
- iLawConnect
He is also the author of several books. Among others, these include:
Trademark Search Skills Training
Learn how to conduct a trademark search or update your existing search skills in this 3-part series of 1-hour interactive webinars. Includes demonstrations and practice exercises to help you gain proficiency in searching the USPTO’s database with field tags and RegEx (Regular Expressions).
Register for Trademark Law Basics & Likelihood of Confusion
Register for The USPTO’s New Trademark Search System
Register for Advanced Trademark Searching with Regular Expressions
MODULE 1: Trademark Law Basics & “Likelihood of Confusion” Analysis
June 10, 2024
12:00 – 1:00 p.m. CDT
1:00 p.m. EDT; 11:00 a.m. MDT; 10:00 a.m. PDT and MST; 9:00 a.m. AKDT.
$30.
What qualifies as a trademark; types of trademarks (word, design, sound, trade dress, etc.); categories of marks; trademark registration and registration systems; the legal requirements for a valid trademark; duration of trademark rights; the Trademark Modernization Act; ethical issues in searching and clearing trademarks; Particular emphasis is given to the concept of “likelihood of confusion,” including the DuPont and Sleekcraft factors, and USPTO and judicial guidance on such things as foreign and legal equivalents, unitary consideration, and relatedness.
MODULE 2: The USPTO’s New Trademark Search System: Field Tags and Drop-Down Menus
June 11, 2024
12:00 – 1:00 p.m. CDT
1:00 p.m. EDT; 11:00 a.m. MDT; 10:00 a.m. PDT and MST; 9:00 a.m. AKDT.
Cost: $30.
On November 30, 2023, the USPTO retired TESS (Trademark Electronic Search System) and replaced it with a new, cloud-based search system. Searches in the new system use different syntax and make use of the RegEx (Regular Expressions) programming language. This module introduces students to the USPTO’s new search system, including guidance on when to use a drop-down menu search and when to use field tags. The second half of this course will focus on searching the USPTO database with field tags, guiding students with demonstrations. The module includes a set of exercises to give students a chance to practice using the new system to search the USPTO database.
MODULE 3: Advanced Trademark Searching with Regular Expressions
June 12, 2024
12:00 – 1:00 p.m. CDT
1:00 p.m. EDT; 11:00 a.m. MDT; 10:00 a.m. PDT and MST; 9:00 a.m. AKDT.
Cost: $40.
Learn how to use Regular Expressions with field tags to conduct a trademark search. The first part of this course explains what you need to know about syntax, wildcards, groupings, quantifiers, and logical operators. The second part describes the elements of a search strategy, beginning with how to immediately rule out a mark (“knock-out” search), then use Regular Expressions to broaden the search to include homophones, alternate spellings, and other potentially confusing similar marks; and finally, how to narrow the results and review records for potential confusion between an existing trademark and the one sought to be cleared. Attendees will also learn about the ethical issues that are raised by what the USPTO calls “dabbling” by non-trademark attorneys, and the line between trademark searches and practicing law. The course includes instruction on how to conduct clearance searches for design marks, too.
The module includes a set of over 50 exercises to give students a chance to practice searching the USPTO database using regular expressions.
* * * * *
CLE credits:
Attorneys:
Alaska, Arizona,* Arkansas, Connecticut, Guam, Hawaii:, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire,* New Jersey,** New York,*** North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Virgin Islands, and Wisconsin: 1 credit hour may be claimed for each course (3.0 credit hours for all three.)
California: Georgia, Vermont: Approval pending.
Self-certify credit may be available in other jurisdictions.
Paralegals:
NALA and NFPA accredited for 1.0 continuing education credit hour for paralegals, per course (3.0 credit hours for all three.)
*Arizona and New Hampshire do not accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. Because these courses have been approved and accredited in jurisidictions with similar MCLE standards, Echion believes they should also qualify for credit in Arizona and New Hampshire.
** New Jersey attorneys who take courses approved for CLE by another state (as these courses are) will receive 1:1 credit for these courses through reciprocity. However, attorneys should be aware that there are differences in requirements from state to state. Attorneys relying on reciprocity must ensure that they are also meeting the requirements of New Jersey’s program. BCLE Reg. 201:4
*** New York State Approved Jurisdiction Policy applies. These courses have been accredited in several Approved Jurisdictions, including Minnesota, Missouri, Arkansas, Wisconsin; others pending.
Copyright and Trademark News
Certiorari petition filed in Warhol/Prince case
(December, 2021) In 1984 Vanity Fair magazine commissioned Andy Warhol to create an image of Prince. Warhol did so by cropping a photograph of Prince that Lynn Goldsmith had taken and creating a series of sixteen images. Warhol claimed the series was a “comment on the manner in which society encounters and consumes celebrity.” Years later, faced with a copyright infringement claim from Goldsmith, the Warhol Foundation sought a declaratory judgment that the series was a transformative use that qualified as fair use.
The district court held in favor of Warhol. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, however, reversed, finding in favor of Goldsmith.
The Warhol Foundation has filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. The petition asserts, among other things, that “[a] follow-on work that deploys preexisting content in the service of saying something new and distinct is much more likely to be fair use….” The case raises an issue very similar to one raised in another 2nd Circuit “Prince” decision, Cariou v. Prince, 714 F.3d 694 (2d Cir. 2013). In that case, the Second Circuit held that alterations to a photograph may qualify as “fair use” if the work, as modified, conveys an entirely different aesthetic. Although that case involved different parties, it involved the same kind of question about whether and when transformative use of a photograph qualifies as fair use.
Granting certiorari would give the Court an opportunity to resolve a split in the circuits on the issue. It would also give the Court an opportunity to clarify the scope of its recent declaration that Google’s copying of 11,500 lines of computer code qualifies as fair use.
Minnesota Attorney Tom James on Avvo.com
© 2020 – 2021 Tom James. All rights reserved. “Thomas B. James,” “Tom James” and “Thomas James” are not separate individuals; they are just alternate forms of a name for the same person. By accessing this website and any page(s) thereof, you acknowledge that you have read and understand the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy and agree to be bound by the terms set out therein. If you do not agree to the terms and conditions, do not access this website or any page thereof.
