• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Articles, Columns, Daily Blog, Featured, Trademark

Float Like a Butterfly, Sting like a Lawsuit: Toys “R” Us Joins the Tablet Wars

Submitted by Priya Mahajan on October 2, 2012 – 1:00 AM6034One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F10%2F02%2Ffloat-like-a-butterfly-sting-like-a-lawsuit-toys-r-us-joins-the-tablet-wars%2FFloat+Like+a+Butterfly%2C+Sting+like+a+Lawsuit%3A+Toys+%E2%80%9CR%E2%80%9D+Us+Joins+the+Tablet+Wars2012-10-02+05%3A00%3A32Priya+Mahajanhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6034

In a lawsuit filed earlier last week (Monday, September 24, 2012), Fuhu, the maker of the Nabi children’s tablet computer, sued Toys “R” Us, the world’s largest toy retailer, claiming that Toys “R” Us infringed on their trademark rights and misappropriated their trade secrets while creating the Tabeo children’s tablet.

The growing market for tablet computers, and hot competition over said market, has spilled over into the area of children’s products; and manufacturers and retailers are taking notice. A quick search of “children’s tablets” reveals many options – vTech’s InnoTAB2, Leap Frog Enterprise’s LeapPad2, and the Kurio Kid’s Tablet are just a few of the options available to consumers. In addition to these tablets, Toys “R” Us previously sold the Nabi children’s tablet through their stores and website. Fuhu is claiming that Toys “R” Us did nothing to promote the tablet and that the toy retailer actually did not order enough stock to meet the demand for it. Fuhu subsequently terminated their contract with Toys “R” Us in January of 2012.

While Toys “R” Us actually sells many children’s tablets, the toy retailer recently entered the manufacturing side of the market by creating the Tabeo, which the website bills as a “fun, safe and innovative learning tablet created just for kids.” However, Fuhu is claiming that the toy giant’s newest gadget is just a rip-off of the Nabi. Fuhu’s lawsuit alleges that Toys “R” Us created the Tabeo by using confidential information obtained through the toy retailer’s exclusive contract with Fuhu. In addition, Fuhu is claming that Toys “R” Us continues to use Fuhu’s confidential information, trade secrets, and trademarks to create the Tabeo.

According to the lawsuit, Fuhu created the Nabi tablet to look like a butterfly, specifically pointing to the fact that “Nabi” is the Korean word for butterfly. The suit alleges Toys “R” Us violated Fuhu’s trademark through trade dress infringement by using the same butterfly shape and design that Fuhu used for the Nabi tablet, including the “removable bumper that fits snugly around the outer edge of the tablet,” which is also in the shape of a butterfly. Fuhu’s suit also alleges trade secret misappropriation, claiming that Toys “R” Us “improperly acquired and/or used and/or solicited and/or disclosed Fuhu’s trade secrets relating to Nabi and solicited at least one customer and/or manufacturer based on the misappropriated trade secrets.”

Fuhu will likely prevail in the claim against Toys “R” Us for trade dress infringement. Trade dress protection refers to the protection afforded to the design and shape of a product’s packaging, configuration, or design.  Trade dress protection is offered for products under the Lanham Act, and most products are protected without registration. Fuhu’s butterfly shaped tablet is likely to fall under the category of product design. For product design to be protected under trade dress, the product must have a secondary meaning. Here, Fuhu’s “butterfly” shape arguably has a secondary meaning – the suit claims that Fuhu’s logo on the Nabi tablet is also in the shape of a butterfly and that it has come to be closely associated with the shape of a butterfly. The butterfly shape has likely acquired secondary meaning because it identifies and distinguishes the Fuhu brand of tablet.

Fuhu may prevail in the claim against Toys “R” Us for misappropriation of trade secrets if the company can show all the elements of trade secret misappropriation. A trade secret includes information, a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process that must be secret, must have independent economic value, and must be subject to reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy to qualify for protection. Fuhu claims that they the information relating to the Nabi tablet was kept secret within the company and that Fuhu made reasonable efforts to maintain the secrecy of the information through a non-disclosure agreement with Toys “R” Us as well as by “ensuring physical security of its records [and by] marking confidential materials with confidentiality legends…” However, Fuhu’s lawsuit states that the information has independent economic value because of the non-disclosure agreements and efforts to maintain secrecy. A court may find this reasoning to be circular, and unless Fuhu can produce articulable proof that the information alleged to have been misappropriated by Toys “R” Us has independent economic value, Fuhu’s trade secret infringement claim is unlikely to prevail.

As the holiday season approaches and the toy industry experiences the traditional sales boost, Fuhu is asking for unspecified monetary damages and for Toys “R” Us to turn over the Tabeos to Fuhu. A spokesperson for Toys “R” Us was unable to comment on the suit at this time.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Priya Mahajan

Priya Mahajan is a 2L interested in IP Law and Real Estate Law. She is currently interning with FEMA. Priya holds a BS in Logistics and Supply Chain Management with a Collateral in International Business from The University of Tennessee. She is originally from Cookeville, Tennessee and her interest in IP law stems from interests in technology and cyberlaw.

Priya Mahajan has written 11 posts for the IPB.

6034One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F10%2F02%2Ffloat-like-a-butterfly-sting-like-a-lawsuit-toys-r-us-joins-the-tablet-wars%2FFloat+Like+a+Butterfly%2C+Sting+like+a+Lawsuit%3A+Toys+%E2%80%9CR%E2%80%9D+Us+Joins+the+Tablet+Wars2012-10-02+05%3A00%3A32Priya+Mahajanhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D6034 »

  • playmobil bunnies says:
    October 12, 2012 at 4:56 AM

    Whether baby is using them in the tub, the inflatable swimming pool or in a bowl of water for some supervised water play, these toys are more than just playthings, they are learning tools.

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business

Shortly after the oral arguments between Monsanto and Bowman, WCL hosted both parties for a post argument discussion. Recently the Supreme Court ruled on the case, requiring annual purchases of Monsanto’s soybeans.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?

Following the explosions on April 15, “Boston Strong” emerged as a viral hashtag on Twitter, a rallying cry at public events, and a logo on all kinds of apparels. It does not take too long for business opportunists to take advantage of this national tragedy.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Copyright and Your Student Aid: MPAA Sends Letters to Universities About Copyright Provisions In the Higher Education Opportunity Act Going for the Gold in Trademark Enforcement: Olympic Branding Taiwan Relaxes Law Limiting Uses of Government-Owned IP Phony Syrup Could Send You to Prison Skechers to Sears: You Better Shape-Up(s) ECJ Issues Ruling in Google Adwords Case Are Human Genes Patentable?: Supreme Court to hear Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Oral Argument Oatmeal v. Oatmeal : Popular Web Comic Sued for Trademark Infringement “If you use ‘Xerox’ the way you use ‘zipper,’ our trademark could be left wide open.” Game Over:  World’s Biggest Online Game Developer Sued for Patent Infringement DVD Encryption Cracking Up For Debate Virginia Tech Settles Trademark Dispute with Hokie Real Estate Company
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Can “Boston Strong” be Trademarked?
  • Bowman Decision a Win for Big Business
  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License