When Trade Mark Litigation Becomes a Strategic Misstep
Pinnacle v Triangl shows how a six-week naming dispute became commercially disproportionate. The core failure was strategic — not assessing proportionality before litigating. Competitive tenders and transparent strategy comparison are structural safeguards built to prevent this.
When Two Marks Look Similar - Power, Perception, and the Court’s Objective Eye
The 1937 Australian Woollen Mills decision shows how easily perceptions of similarity can drive escalation. The Court required real evidence of likely deception — a reminder that objective assessment matters more than suspicion. Clean Law’s two-lawyer structure keeps those assessments separate from advocacy, reducing misreads and cost spiral.
When Product Claims Blur the Line: What the Botox® Case Shows About Power, Perception, and Proof
The High Court held that “instant Botox® alternative” was not used as a trade mark and conveyed no long-term efficacy claim. This case shows how assumptions about brand strength and reputation can drive unnecessary escalation. Clean Law’s one-path funding model is built to prevent those escalations before they become costly.