Indiana Intellectual Property Law News

July 14, 2025

Rock and Troll: Led Zeppelin Takes on Online Sellers in Trademark Infringement Suit

A British company owned by the members of Led Zeppelin has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Indiana, accusing a group of unidentified online sellers—referred to in the complaint as “The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A”—of selling counterfeit merchandise that uses the band’s trademarks without authorization. The company, Superhype Tapes Limited, is based in London and owns the rights to several trademarks associated with Led Zeppelin, one of the most influential rock bands in history. The trademarks at issue in the case are LED ZEPPELIN (U.S. Reg. No. 4,340,692) and THE LED ZEPPELIN EXPERIENCE (U.S. Reg. No. 5,663,514).

According to the complaint, the online sellers have created e-commerce stores designed to trick consumers into thinking they’re buying legitimate Led Zeppelin merchandise. These stores, operating under multiple aliases, allegedly use similar design elements and even search keywords tied to the band’s name to attract buyers looking for official products.

The lawsuit says that the sellers are offering unauthorized goods such as clothing, posters, and other items that imitate the real products made and sold under Led Zeppelin’s brand. Superhype Tapes claims the merchandise not only infringes on their trademarks but also harms their reputation by confusing customers and diluting the value of the brand.

July 11, 2025

BMI Cranks Up the Volume in Another Lawsuit Over Unauthorized Jams: Broadcast Music, Inc v. Mikie’s Pub

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) along with several music publishers have filed yet another lawsuit in Indiana this year (previous lawsuit), this time against 5135 Emerson LLC, which operates Mikie’s Pub in Indianapolis, and against an individual named Scott Coyle. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants publicly played copyrighted songs from the BMI catalog without securing the necessary license.

According to the complaint, BMI is authorized to license performance rights for more than 22 million musical works and represents the other named plaintiffs, each of whom owns rights to one or more of the songs allegedly played without permission. BMI claims it contacted the defendants more than 75 times since January 2024 via phone, email, and mail—including sending cease and desist notices—in an effort to secure compliance and avoid legal action.

Despite these warnings, the lawsuit alleges that Mikie’s Pub continued to publicly perform music without a proper license, leading to three specific instances of copyright infringement. The complaint details the titles of the songs involved, the dates they were played, and the fact that no permission or license was obtained. BMI argues that these acts were willful and part of an ongoing pattern of infringement.

July 7, 2025

Northern District of Indiana to Begin Directly Assigning Magistrate Judges to New Cases

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Starting July 7, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana will implement a new order changing how civil cases are assigned—expanding the role of Magistrate Judges.

Most civil cases will now be randomly assigned to either a District or Magistrate Judge. If a Magistrate Judge is assigned, parties will receive a notice after the initial scheduling order and have 21 days to consent to the Magistrate Judge handling the entire case, including trial. If all parties consent, the Magistrate Judge will oversee all proceedings. If any party declines, the case goes to a District Judge, with the Magistrate Judge assisting with pretrial matters.

The court highlights Magistrate Judges as vital to timely and efficient case resolution. Because they don’t have to prioritize criminal cases, they can often move civil cases faster, saving time and cost.

July 4, 2025

One Subscription, Many Downloads, Big Trouble: Energy Intelligence Group Inc. v. Calumet, Inc.

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Energy Intelligence Group, Inc. and its UK-based counterpart have filed a lawsuit against Indianapolis, Indiana company, Calumet, Inc., claiming that Calumet repeatedly copied and distributed issues of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted publications—Oil Daily and Energy Intelligence News—without authorization. The lawsuit, brought in the U.S. District Court for Southern Indiana, accuses Calumet of willful copyright infringement, and seeks damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees.

The plaintiffs, long-time publishers in the energy sector, allege that Calumet subscribed to only one copy of their publications but shared the content with multiple employees in violation of clear copyright warnings. According to the complaint, Calumet had been a subscriber since 2004 and renewed its subscription annually for a single-copy license, which explicitly barred distribution or forwarding. Despite this, internal data from Energy Intelligence’s servers showed that, over just a few months, dozens of issues were downloaded hundreds of times on over 100 devices. This pattern, the plaintiffs argue, reveals a systematic practice of unauthorized copying and internal distribution.

The complaint outlines extensive steps taken by the publisher to warn users of copyright restrictions, including notices in emails, on their website, and within the publications themselves. It claims that Calumet ignored these warnings and refused offers to increase the number of licensed users.

July 3, 2025

191 Trademark Registrations Issued to Indiana Entities in June 2025

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 191 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in June 2025 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:

7840585	INDIANA BEACH
7828802	FAST ACT
7841673	M.O.M. METHOD
7819850	CAPXBALL
7819849	CAPSBALL
7820674	ECOBAKE
7820675	ECOBAKE
7828467	ALTERNATIVE CONVERSATIONS
7815746

June 30, 2025

Field Tested, Patent Contested: Precision Planter Solutions v. Solid Rock AG Solutions

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Missouri-based company, Precision Planter Solutions, LLC, has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Northern Indiana against Solid Rock AG Solutions, Inc., accusing the company of patent infringement. According to the complaint, Precision Planter owns a patent—U.S. Patent No. 12,274,187—that describes a method and apparatus aimed at extending the service life of agricultural planters by addressing wear and tear in pivoting support arms. The patented technology seeks to solve problems caused by constant motion over uneven farmland, which can lead to equipment damage and costly repairs.

Precision Planter alleges that Solid Rock is making, using, selling, and offering to sell products that unlawfully use the technology covered by this patent. The complaint specifically points to Solid Rock’s parallel arm rebuilding and exchange systems, sold and promoted through its websites, which Precision Planter says match each part of its patented design. Images and descriptions from the websites are cited to support these claims, including the use of metallic collars and bushings that fit the specifications outlined in the patent.

The lawsuit claims that Solid Rock’s actions violate federal patent law and that the infringement is ongoing and willful. Precision Planter argues that this has caused financial damage, loss of market share, and harm to its reputation, and that these harms will continue unless the court intervenes.

June 27, 2025

Cease and Desist or Compose and Persist? Indiana Bible College v. Fred Bock Music Company et al.

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Indiana Bible College has filed a lawsuit in federal court against Fred Bock Music Company, Dr. Rosephanye Powell, and up to 100 unnamed individuals or entities. The dispute centers on a piece of music titled “John 1,” which the college claims it composed independently. The defendants argue that “John 1” infringes on the copyright of Dr. Powell’s earlier musical work, “The Word Was God,” which is also based on the same passage of scripture from the Bible. (Click on the links to hear renditions of each song.)

The conflict began when the defendants sent the college a cease-and-desist letter, asserting that “John 1” was a derivative work and constituted copyright infringement. Indiana Bible College denies these claims and insists that their composition is original and does not use any protectable elements of Dr. Powell’s work.

According to the complaint, the defendants went beyond legal demands by sharing statements online and with news outlets accusing the college of plagiarism and intellectual dishonesty. The college alleges that these statements were not only false but also harmful, damaging its reputation and disrupting relationships with students, musical collaborators, and organizations that had planned to perform or promote the piece. It also claims that the public allegations caused people to question the integrity of the composers involved and led to a loss of opportunities and trust.

June 23, 2025

Drop-Down, Drag-Out Fight: Brotherhood Mutual vs. Aloft Media, et al.

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Fort Wayne, Indiana – Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company has filed a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment against Aloft Media, LLC, George Street Partners, Todd Schmidt, and George Andrew Gordon. The case centers on a patent dispute over U.S. Patent No. 10,372,793, which Brotherhood says is being wrongly used to demand a licensing payment.

According to the complaint, Aloft Media claims that Brotherhood’s website infringes on this patent, which covers a method involving drop-down menus on a web page. Brotherhood argues the patent is invalid and unenforceable and claims it does not infringe on any part of it. Brotherhood also says that the technology described in the patent is not new or inventive and would not meet modern patent standards, especially following the Supreme Court’s 2016 Alice decision, which raised the bar for patenting abstract ideas implemented on computers.

Brotherhood is asking the court to declare that its website does not infringe the patent, that the patent itself is invalid, and that it cannot be enforced due to inequitable conduct—alleging that key information was intentionally withheld during the patent’s approval process. The complaint outlines what Brotherhood claims were misrepresentations or omissions in the history of the patent application, Aloft’s record of filing at least 14 patent infringement lawsuits in Texas, and a complex web of related entities that frequently file similar patent lawsuits.

June 20, 2025

Sole Proprietors? Treace Puts Its Foot Down in lawsuit against Zimmer Biomet and Paragon 28

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

Treace Medical Concepts, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. and Paragon 28, Inc., accusing the two companies of infringing on four of its patents (Patent No. 12,102,368; Patent No. 12,268,397; Patent No. 12,268,428; Patent No. 12,274,481) related to the Lapiplasty® system. This system is used in bunion correction surgery and was designed to improve upon older surgical methods that Treace says were less effective.

In the complaint, Treace alleges that the defendants are selling products that are too similar to the patented features of the Lapiplasty® system, including both the surgical tools and the techniques used during the procedure. Treace emphasizes that its system is unique in how it corrects bunions in three dimensions and guides the surgeon through each step to produce more consistent results for patients.

The timing of the lawsuit is notable, coming shortly after Zimmer Biomet finalized its acquisition of Paragon 28 in April 2025 for approximately $1.2 billion. As a result of the deal, Treace may now be challenging a broader range of products that include Paragon’s technologies, which could overlap with Treace’s intellectual property.

June 16, 2025

Brew-Haha Over Branding: Dog ‘N Suds Pours On the Pressure in Trademark Dispute

By Overhauser Law Offices, LLC

An Indiana-based company, TK&C’S, LLC, which operates under the name Dog ‘N Suds, has filed a lawsuit in federal court against a Michigan business, Airline Dog ‘N Suds, Inc., and its president, David J. Hosticka. The complaint centers around trademark infringement, unfair competition, and breach of contract.

Dog ‘N Suds alleges that it owns the exclusive rights to several trademarks associated with its brand, including names, logos, and recipes that date back to the 1950s and have been formally registered for decades. According to the lawsuit, Dog ‘N Suds entered into a licensing agreement with Airline Dog ‘N Suds in 2007, giving them permission to use these trademarks and recipes in a defined region of Michigan. That agreement expired in 2017 and was not renewed.

Despite the expiration of the license, Dog ‘N Suds claims that the Michigan business continued to use its name, branding, and products without authorization. The lawsuit includes allegations that Airline Dog ‘N Suds has continued selling food and root beer under the Dog ‘N Suds branding, which the Indiana company views as a violation of trademark law and a breach of the original licensing agreement. Dog ‘N Suds further claims that attempts to stop the use—including cease-and-desist letters sent in April 2025—were ignored or refused.