Untitled-design

The top photo has Tara Mapes’ copyright watermark on it. The bottom photograph, while nearly identical, has Angelic Ice Photography Branding instead of Tara Mapes’ watermark.

A new lawsuit has been filed by photographer and digital artist Tara Mapes, who claims her copyrighted work has been repeatedly copied and distributed without permission through Facebook groups. Mapes, who lives in Guilford, Indiana, alleges that her original images and design templates were taken, altered, and sold by individuals and businesses online, with some groups having memberships in the hundreds of thousands.

The complaint names as defendants several unidentified individuals who manage the Facebook groups, a South African business called Angelic Ice Photography and its owner Tanisha Lloyd, and Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook. Mapes asserts that Angelic Ice, for example, removed her watermarks, replaced them with its own branding, and used her creations to advertise its services to tens of thousands of followers.

Allseason IpCo, LLC has filed a lawsuit against two Chinese defendants, Jiabao Wang and a company nicknamed Guangzhou. The case centers on allegations of willful copyright infringement and misrepresentation under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

PicAllseason IpCo, which sells health supplements under the brand name CLEAN NUTRA or CLEAN NUTRACEUTICALS, claims that it owns the rights to several trademarks and copyrights, including the label for its product “VASCU GLOW” (Registration Number VA 2-454-182) The company says it discovered that the defendants were selling a nearly identical product on Amazon through the seller name VIFSSG, using what Allseason describes as a copied version of its copyrighted product label.

According to the complaint, Allseason filed a takedown notice with Amazon in July 2025, which resulted in the removal of the disputed product. Shortly afterward, the defendants submitted a counter-notice to Amazon stating that the removal was based on a mistake or misidentification. Allseason argues that this counter-notice was a false statement because the defendants were not authorized to use its copyrighted work. Under the DMCA, such a counter-notice caused Amazon to reinstate the listing unless Allseason filed a lawsuit within ten business days, which led to this legal action.

Camco Manufacturing, LLC has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against Seaflo Marine & RV North America, LLC. The case centers on allegations of trademark, trade dress, and patent infringement, as well as unfair competition.

TradeDressCamco, a company based in North Carolina with more than five decades in the recreational vehicle, boating, and camping accessories market, claims that Seaflo has copied its distinctive orange trade dress used on sewer hoses and fittings for RVs. According to the complaint, Camco has sold products with this design since 2006 and holds a federal trademark registration (U.S. Reg. No. 5,864,456) for the use of the color orange on those products. Camco argues that Seaflo’s products are so similar in appearance that consumers could be misled into believing they originate from or are associated with Camco.

In addition to the trade dress allegations, Camco asserts th120Patent-1at Seaflo has829Patent infringed several of its patents, including one covering a corrugated hose with a bayonet connector (US Patent 11/732,829 B1) and another covering the ornamental design of a tongue jack pad (US Patent D893,120 S1). Camco claims that Seaflo’s competing sewer hose kits and jack stands are identical or nearly identical to its patented designs and therefore violate U.S. patent law.

The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following  272 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in August 2025 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:

RegistrationNumber Wordmark
7918163
7918162 COMPASS PARK
7922258 I INDUSTRIALPC.COM
7895756 FOUNDATIONS FOR INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION
7908594 THE EMPLOYER, HEALTHCARE PROVIDER NETWORK

Continue reading

A trademark dispute over the name “JD Sports” has reached federal court in Indiana. The Finish Line, Inc., which does business as JD Sports, along with its parent company JD Sports Fashion Plc, is asking the court to declare that its use of the JD Sports name does not infringe on the rights of J.D. Sport LLC, a Pennsylvania company.

Pic-2JD Sports Fashion Plc, based in the United Kingdom, operates thousands of stores worldwide and more than 300 in the United States. It holds several federal trademark registrations for “JD” and “JD Sports,” some classified as incontestable under U.S. law. The company states it has used these marks in the U.S. for years, first through online sales and later through physical stores, including several in Pennsylvania.

J.D. Sport LLC, founded in 1989 in Pennsylvania, operates a single store that provides custom embroidery, screen printing, and team apparel for local schools and organizations. The business does not have federal trademark registrations and instead relies on common law rights tied to its local use of the “J.D. Sport” name.Pic1-2

A federal lawsuit has been filed in Indiana by New York photographer John Taggart against Lonkero, LLC, which does business as The Long Drink Company. The case centers on claims that the LLC used one of Taggart’s copyrighted photographs without permission on its social media accounts.

PicAccording to the complaint, Taggart created and licensed a photograph of a line at a Manhattan bar, first published in March 2020 and registered with the U.S. Copyright Office the following month. He alleges that The Long Drink Company copied and posted the image on both its Instagram and Facebook pages in February 2025 as part of promotional content. Taggart says he did not grant a license or authorization for these uses and only discovered the posts in June 2025.

The filing accuses the company of knowingly engaging in copyright infringement by reproducing and displaying the photograph for commercial gain. Taggart claims the posts boosted the company’s online traffic and business revenue while undermining the market value of his work. He also argues that the company failed to maintain proper copyright compliance policies, amounting to willful disregard of the law.

Pic2-300x177Cheng USA, Inc., a company based in Elkhart, Indiana and doing business under the names Arterra Distribution and WFCO Technologies, has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against Kunshan Jinhui New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., which operates under the brand name Bestrenogy. The defendant is based in Jiangsu, China.

The lawsuit alleges that Bestrenogy is infringing on Cheng’s U.S. Patent No. 12,113,377, which covers a specific type of power conversion technology used in their popular WF-9855 converter charger.  According to Cheng, Bestrenogy has been manufacturing, importing, using, and selling — or offering to sell — its AD-CB Battery Charger 9800 Series in the United States, and that this product incorporates technology covered by Cheng’s patent without authorization. The complaint includes images and descriptions of Bestrenogy’s product sold on Amazon.com that Cheng claims directly infringes on the patent.Pic3-300x268

Cheng further accuses Bestrenogy of willful infringement, meaning it believes the defendant knew about the patent and still proceeded with the infringing activity. In addition to patent infringement, Cheng is also bringing claims of unfair competition and false designation of origin. The company alleges that Bestrenogy’s marketing materials, including the use of certain symbols, customer service contacts, and product descriptions, could mislead consumers into believing Bestrenogy’s products are associated with or approved by Cheng.

The U.S. Trademark Office issued the following 172 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in July 2025 based on applications filed by Indiana trademark attorneys:

 

RegistrationNumber Wordmark
7859825 EPIC
7849508 FC
7865244 P
7865245 POST PARTUM CARE USA
7848097 LUSSO

Continue reading

A recent lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana centers on allegations of copyright infringement involving a photograph of barbecued pork ribs. The plaintiff, Rockefeller Photos, LLC, a media company based in Florida, accuses Lighthouse Custom Meats LLC, a meat processing business in Bloomfield, Indiana, of using a copyrighted photograph without permission.

According to the complaint, the photo in question—entitled “PorkRib001_ADL, 07-05-1999”—was created by a professional photographer for a company called Prepared Food Photos, which is represented by Rockefeller Photos. This image was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in 2017 and assigned Registration Number VA-2-046-789. Rockefeller Photos claims it was granted exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and take legal action over any unauthorized use of the image.Pic1

The complaint states that Lighthouse Custom Meats used the copyrighted photo on its Facebook page on two separate occasions in May 2023 to promote its business. The plaintiff alleges the image was likely found online and used without obtaining a license or seeking permission.

Photographer Sam Mugraby has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit in the Southern District of Indiana against Nuthak Insurance, LLC. Mugraby, an Israeli citizen and owner of Boxist.com, alleges that the Indiana-based insurance company used one of his copyrighted images without permission.

The image in question is titled “Jesus On Cross At Sunset,” a professionally created photo that Mugraby registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in 2016 (Registration No. VA-2-031-867). According to the complaint, the photograph includes copyright information identifying Mugraby as the creator and owner. Mugraby claims that Nuthak Insurance used the image on its website and social media to advertise its services without securing a license or obtaining permission.Pic-1

Mugraby discovered the use in August 2024 and says he contacted the company in writing. The complaint argues that the image was used for commercial purposes, and that Nuthak Insurance either ignored or removed the visible copyright notice.

Contact Information