Gang Caov.Apple Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 28, 2021

91239006 (T.T.A.B. Jun. 28, 2021)

Hearing: June 17, 2021 Mailed: June 28, 2021

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
_____

Gang Cao
v.
Apple, Inc.
_____

Opposition No. 91239006
_____

Marc C. Levy and Brigid C. Mahoney of Seed IP Law Group LLP for Gang Cao.

Dale M. Cendali and Mary Mazzello of Kirkland & Ellis LLP for Apple, Inc.
_____

Before Bergsman, Lynch, and Johnson, Administrative Trademark Judges.

Opinion by Bergsman, Administrative Trademark Judge:

Apple, Inc. (Applicant) seeks registration on the Principal Register of the mark
LIVE PHOTOS, in standard character form, for “computer software for recording and
displaying images, video and sound,” in International Class 9.1 Applicant disclaimed
the exclusive right to use the word “Photos.”

1 Serial No. 86868731 filed January 7, 2016, under Section 1(a) of the Trademark Act,
15 U.S.C. § 1051(a), based on Applicant’s claim of first use of its mark anywhere as of
September 9, 2015, and first use of its mark in commerce as of September 25, 2015.
This Opinion Is Not a
Precedent of the TTAB

Opposition No. 91239006

- 2 -

Gang Cao (Opposer) opposes the registration on the ground that LIVE PHOTOS
is generic and, in the alternative, if LIVE PHOTOS is not generic then it is merely
descriptive and it has not acquired distinctiveness.
Applicant, in its Answer, denies the salient allegations in the Notice of Opposition.
In addition, Applicant raised several affirmative defenses. Some of its “affirmative
defenses” are simply amplifications of its denials and are not true affirmative
defenses. With regard to remaining affirmative defenses, because Applicant did not
discuss them in its trial brief, Applicant has waived them. See Swiss Watch Int’l Inc.
v. Fed’n of the Swiss Watch Indus., 101 USPQ2d 1731, 1734 n.4 (TTAB 2012)
(affirmative defenses deemed waived where no mention of them in trial brief);
Barbara’s Bakery Inc. v. Landesman, 82 USPQ2d 1283, 1292 (TTAB 2007) (where
applicant did not argue the affirmative defense of equitable estoppel in her brief, the
affirmative defense was given no consideration). We, therefore, do address any of
Applicant’s “affirmative defenses.”
I. Evidentiary Issues
A. Improper rebuttal
During Opposer’s rebuttal testimony period, Opposer introduced four notices of
reliance on Internet evidence “for the purpose of showing generic and/or descriptive
use of the term ‘live photo(s)’ with respect to photos or images that incorporate motion
or animation, as used by third party cell phone manufactures or wireless phone
carriers,”2 “by third party cell phone or table manufacturers or retailers, and

2 66 TTABVUE 2.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 3 -

reviewers or writers discussing such products,”3 and “by third party Android app
developers, and in connection with the Google Pixel phone.”4 In addition, Opposer
introduced “certified cover pages for [patent] application nos. 62/207385, 62/253136,
and 62/256136” “for the purpose of showing Applicant has standing,”5 and Internet
copies of “Applicant’s opposed trademark applications in the Canadian Intellectual
Property Office (CIPO), and a decision from the European Union Intellectual
Property Office (EUIPO) adverse to Applicant, both of which touch upon the issue of
the generic and/or descriptive nature of the term ‘live photo(s)’ with respect to photos
or images that incorporate motion or animation.”6
Applicant objects to these notices of reliance, inter alia, on the ground that the
evidence in the notices of reliance comprises improper rebuttal.7 In opposition to
Applicant’s objection, Opposer argues that the above-noted notices of reliance are not
improper rebuttal.
During its rebuttal period, a party may introduce facts and
witnesses to “to explain, repel, counteract, or disprove the
evidence of the adverse party.” Apollo Med. Extrusion
Techs., Inc. v. Med. Extrusion Techs., Inc., 123 U.S.P.Q.2d
(BNA) 1844, 1847 (T.T.A.B. 2017). The evidence [Opposer]
introduced in the rebuttal period is proper as intended to

3 67 TTABVUE 2. See also 71 TTABVUE 2.
4 68 TTABVUE 2.
5 69 TTABVUE 2.
Our decisions have previously analyzed the requirements of Sections 1063 and 1064 under
the rubric of “standing.” We now refer to this inquiry as entitlement to a statutory cause of
action. Despite the change in nomenclature, our prior decisions and those of the Federal
Circuit interpreting “standing” under §§ 1063 and 1064 remain applicable.
6 65 TTABVUE 2.
7 Applicant’s Brief, pp. 33-34 (74 TTABVUE 36-37).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 4 -

explain, repel, counteract, or disprove [Applicant’s]
arguments and evidence that uses of “live photos” as
generic or descriptive were either de minimis, from only
non-U.S. sources, or didn’t include the precise term “live
photos” but rather only synonymous terms. [Opposer’s]
rebuttal evidence, including uses of the exact term “live
photos” by major competitors and from U.S. sources, is thus
proper to rebut Apple’s evidence and arguments.8
___
Here, [Opposer] properly used the rebuttal period to
“introduce facts and witnesses appropriate to deny,
explain, or otherwise discredit the facts and witnesses
adduced by the opponent.” [Am. Meat Inst. v. Horace W.
Longacre, Inc., 211 USPQ 712, 719 (TTAB 1981)]. Further,
“[t]he fact that evidence might have been offered in chief
does not preclude its admission as rebuttal.” Apollo Med.
Extrusion Techs., Inc., 123 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1844, 1847
(quoting Data Packaging Corp. v. Morning Star, Inc., 212
U.S.P.Q. 109, 113 (T.T.A.B. 1981). Regardless, it is within
the Board’s discretion “to consider improper rebuttal
evidence, particularly when an objecting party fails to
demonstrate that the evidence raises new or surprising
issues or any prejudice resulting from the failure.” Here,
even if [Opposer’s] rebuttal evidence was improper (which
it is not), [Opposer] did not include evidence in his rebuttal
period that would surprise or otherwise prejudice
[Applicant].9
The burden is on Opposer, in the first instance, to come forward during its own
testimony period with proof of the essential elements of its claims, including that the
term LIVE PHOTOS is generic, merely descriptive, and has not acquired
distinctiveness. Wet Seal, Inc. v. FD Mgm’t, Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1629, 1632 (TTAB 2007).
Opposer may not use its rebuttal period to submit testimony or other evidence that

8 Opposer’s Reply Brief, p. 12 (75 TTABVUE 18).
9 Opposer’s Reply Brief, p. 13 (75 TTABVUE 19).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 5 -

is properly part of its case-in-chief. Jules Jurgensen/Rhapsody, Inc. v. Baumberger,
91 USPQ2d 1443, 1445 n.5 (TTAB 2009). See also Trademark Rule 2.121(b)(1),
37 C.F.R. § 2.121(b)(1) (“The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board will schedule a
testimony period for the plaintiff to present its case in chief, a testimony period for
the defendant to present its case and to meet the case of the plaintiff, and a testimony
period for the plaintiff to present evidence in rebuttal.”).
We sustain Applicant’s objection to Opposer’s rebuttal notices of reliance to the
extent that we will consider the rebuttal evidence only if it rebuts Applicant’s
evidence (e.g., the Internet evidence is directed to a foreign market, the term “Live
Photo(s) is not currently being used in the Internet evidence, the third party is not
displaying the term “Live Photo(s), etc.) but not for the purpose of supporting
Opposer’s case-in-chief. See Helene Curtis Indus. Inc. v. Suave Shoe Corp.,
13 USPQ2d 1618, 1625 n.33 (TTAB 1989) (finding opposer’s rebuttal survey bears on
the validity and probative value of applicant’s survey and, therefore, considered to
rebut applicant’s survey but not to support opposer’s case-in-chief).
B. Numerous objections
Applicant lodged numerous objections to the testimony and evidence Opposer
introduced. Applicant raised a number of objections, based on hearsay, lack of
probative value, unfair prejudice, etc. We do not address in detail these objections,
many of which go to the weight rather than the admissibility of this evidence.
Administrative Trademark Judges are not lay jurors who might easily be misled,
confused, or prejudiced by irrelevant evidence hear Board proceedings. Cf. Harris v.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 6 -

Rivera, 454 U.S. 339, 346 (1981) (“In bench trials, judges routinely hear inadmissible
evidence that they are presumed to ignore when making decisions.”). Mindful of the
objections, we have accorded this evidence whatever probative value we deem
appropriate. See Spiritline Cruises LLC v. Tour Mgm’t Servs., Inc., 2020 USPQ2d
48324, *2 (TTAB 2020); Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Freud America, Inc.,
2019 USPQ2d 460354, at *4 (TTAB 2019) (declining to individually address
numerous objections that go to weight rather than admissibility, noting that the
Board is capable of weighing the relevance or the strength or weakness of the
evidence and according it appropriate probative value), appeal docketed, No. 20-cv-
109 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 3, 2020); Luxco, Inc. v. Consejo Regulador del Tequila, A.C.,
121 USPQ2d 1477, 1479 (TTAB 2017).
II. The Record
The record includes the pleadings and, by operation of Trademark Rule 2.122(b),
37 C.F.R. § 2.122(b), the file of Applicant’s application.
A. Opposer’s Testimony and Evidence.

1. Notice of reliance on online dictionary definitions of “Live,” “Life,”
and “Photograph”;10

2. Notice of reliance on printed Internet publications purportedly to
show generic or descriptive use of term “live photo(s)”;11

3. Notice of reliance on a copy of Applicant’s U.S. Patent Application
No. US 2017/0109596 A1 purportedly to show generic or descriptive
use of the term “live photo(s)”; 12

10 33 TTABVUE.
11 34 TTABVUE.
12 34 TTABVUE 154-166.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 7 -

4. Notice of reliance on printed Internet publications purportedly to
show generic or descriptive use of the term “live photo(s)” and
“synonymous terms with respect to photos or images that incorporate
motion or animation”;13

5. Notice of reliance on printed Internet publications purportedly to
show generic or descriptive use of the term “live photo(s)” and
“synonymous terms with respect to photos or images that incorporate
motion or animation”;14

6. Notice of reliance on printed Internet publications purportedly to
show generic or descriptive use of the term “live photo(s)” and
“synonymous terms with respect to photos or images that incorporate
motion or animation”;15

7. Notice of reliance on printed Internet publications purportedly to
show generic or descriptive use of the term “live photo(s)” and
“synonymous terms with respect to photos or images that incorporate
motion or animation”;16

8. Opposer’s testimony declaration;17

9. Applicant’s cross-examination deposition of Opposer by written
question;18 and

10. Opposer’s rebuttal notices of reliance discussed above.

B. Applicant’s Testimony and Evidence.

1. Testimony declaration of Thomas R. La Perle, Applicant’s Legal
Department Senior Director;19

13 35 TTABVUE.
14 36 TTABVUE.
15 37 TTABVUE.
16 38 TTABVUE.
17 39 and 41 TTABVUE.
18 48 TTABVUE.
19 49 and 54 TTABVUE.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 8 -

2. Opposer’s cross-examination deposition of Thomas R. La Perle;20

3. Testimony declaration of Erika Dillon, Senior Paralegal for
Applicant’s counsel, authenticating LexisNexis publications posted
on 52 and 53 TTABVUE;21

4. Testimony affidavit of Elizabeth Rosenberg, Records Request
Processor at the Internet Archive;22

5. Notice of reliance on printouts from Applicant’s website, printouts
from YouTube videos, printouts from Internet websites;23 and

6. Notice of reliance on Opposer’s responses to Applicant’s first set of
requests for admission.24

III. Entitlement to a statutory cause of action
Opposer’s entitlement to a statutory cause of action, formerly referred to as
“standing” by the Federal Circuit and the Board, is an element of the plaintiff’s case
in every inter partes case. See Corcamore, LLC v. SFM, LLC, 978 F.3d 1298, 2020
USPQ2d 11277 (Fed. Cir. 2020) ), cert. denied, ___ S. Ct. ___ (2021); Australian
Therapeutic Supplies Pty. Ltd. v. Naked TM, LLC, 965 F.3d 1370, 2020 USPQ2d

20 63 TTABVUE. The Board posted the portions of the La Perle cross-examination testimony
designated confidential at 64 TTABVUE.
21 50 TTABVUE.
22 51 TTABVUE.
23 52 and 53 TTABVUE.
24 53 TTABVUE 12-26. A party may introduce only an admission to a request for admission
through a notice of reliance. Trademark Rule 2.120(k)(3)(i), 37 C.F.R. § 2.120(k)(3)(i). A denial
or statement that the responding party cannot respond to the request does not establish the
truth or falsity of the assertion, but rather leaves the matter for proof at trial. Life Zone Inc.
v. Middleman Grp. Inc., 87 USPQ2d 1953, 1957 n.10 (TTAB 2008) (denials to requests for
admission inadmissible because “unlike an admission (or a failure to respond which
constitutes an admission), the denial of a request for admission establishes neither the truth
nor the falsity of the assertion, but rather leaves the matter for proof at trial.”). As such, we
have considered only the admissions to the requests for admission.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 9 -

10837 (Fed. Cir. 2020); Empresa Cubana Del Tabaco v. Gen. Cigar Co., 753 F.3d 1270,
111 USPQ2d 1058, 1062 (Fed. Cir. 2014). To establish entitlement to a statutory
cause of action, a plaintiff must demonstrate: (i) an interest falling within the zone of
interests protected by the statute and (ii) a reasonable belief in damage that is
proximately caused by the registration of a mark. Corcamore, 2020 USPQ2d 11277
at *4. See also Empresa Cubana, 111 USPQ2d at 1062; Ritchie v. Simpson, 170 F.3d
1092, 50 USPQ2d 1023, 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1999); Lipton Indus., Inc. v. Ralston Purina
Co., 670 F.2d 1024, 213 USPQ 185, 189 (TTAB 1982).
When challenging a term as descriptive or generic, a plaintiff may establish its
entitlement to a statutory cause of action by showing that it is engaged in the sale or
offering of goods the same as or related to those covered by the challenged
mark. See Eastman Kodak Co. v. Bell & Howell Document Mgmt. Prods.
Co., 23 USPQ2d 1878, 1879 (TTAB 1992), aff'd, 994 F.2d 1569, 16 USPQ2d
1912 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Binney & Smith Inc. v. Magic Marker Indus., Inc., 222 USPQ
1003, 1010 (TTAB 1984).
Applicant is seeking to register its purported mark LIVE PHOTOS for “computer
software for recording and displaying images, video and sound.”
The LIVE PHOTOS software feature combines the user’s
photograph with video and sound. When a user takes a
photograph with the LIVE PHOTOS feature, the user’s
device captures what happens a second and a half before
and a second and half after the photograph being taken,
and pairs the still photograph with the simultaneously
recorded video to create a new hybrid medium. When a
Opposition No. 91239006

- 10 -

user presses and holds the still photograph, she sees the
simultaneously captured recording.25
___
… Live Photos is not just capturing the image, it’s also
displaying the image, so that - - that feature is also part of
the - - of the applied-for goods and part of the Live Photos
software, so it could be both. You could be viewing Live
Photos on your Apple devices, iPhotos feature, but you can
also be viewing multiple iPhoto - - you know, the resulting
file on other devices, too.26
Opposer testified that he has developed software that creates a similar effect as
Applicant’s software.
5. … I developed software called “Full Screen Spin
Browser” that works with a mouse device on desktop or
laptop computers to animate static images by controlling
the forward and backward advance of frames. By using a
mouse device and “Full Screen Spin Browser,” a user can
put a set of static photos in motion by rotating the mouse
wheel.
6. In addition to my “Full Screen Spin Browser”
software, I developed a new kind of input device that
incorporated a spinning wheel that a user could rotate in
different directions and at various speeds. The direction
and speed of rotation controlled the sequence and speed
that the user viewed images on the computer to which the
device was connected. I designed this device to be used with
any Mac or PC computer via a USB port. My device works
with many photos and video applications, including Apple
Photos, Apple iMovie and Apple Quicktime.
___

25 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶11 (49 TTABVUE 4). See also La Perle Cross-Examination Dep.,
p. 22 (63 TTABVUE 26) (“The feature is intended to capture a still image, and then this,
second half before and after the - - main photo.”).
26 La Perle Cross-Examination Dep., p. 30 (63 TTABVUE 34). Mr. La Perle also testified that
“Live Photos” has an editing feature and a “Boomerang” functionality, a “kind of forward and
back, and you can add loops to the photos.” Id. at pp. 17-18 (63 TTABVUE 22-23).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 11 -

8. The spinning wheel computer input devices and
“Full Screen Spin Browser” software I developed work with
a series of photos or video frames of a subject that is in
motion. For example, a user might take a series of photos
of a baseball pitcher making a pitch using burst mode,
which captures a number of sequential photos of the
pitcher throughout the full motion of the pitch. By using
my device and my software, a user can quickly spin
through the photos such that the pitcher appears to be in
motion. In this way, my device and my software are capable
of adding motion to still images, with the speed of spinning
the wheel on the device dictating the speed of the motion
observed in the images. This creates an effect for the viewer
that is very similar to the effect created by the historic
zoetrope machine. In addition, my devices can also be used
to control video interactively by controlling video frames
forward and backward. I also developed the web-based
technology using HTML and JAVASCRIPT for the same
function which does not require software download and
installation.27
In 2016, Opposer published his “SpinFun” app for use on an iPhone or iPad with
the same functionality: users may browse photographs by spinning his/her finger on
the screen of the phone. “The more quickly the user spins his or her finger, the more
quickly the photos move.”28 “[T]he SpinFun app can be used to add animation – i.e.,
life – to static photos.”29
In 2017, Opposer developed “Spin Explorer” that provides the same functionality
to video frames.
Using Spin Explorer, a user can turn static video frames
into living or animated photos by using a spin gesture. A

27 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶¶5-6 and 8 (39 TTABVUE 5 and 7).
28 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶10 (39 TTABVUE 8).
29 Id.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 12 -

user spins clockwise to move video frames forward and
spins counter-clockwise to move video frames backward.30
Users may download SpinFun and Spin Explorer from Opposer’s App Store.31
In anticipation of marketing his software, Opposer purchased the urls
and .32 However, upon learning Applicant adopted
LIVE PHOTOS for its moving photograph feature, Opposer became concerned
Applicant would object to Opposer’s use of “Live Photo” to describe Opposer’s software
and he put his plans for using the and urls on hold.33
I wish to use “live photo” in its ordinary sense to refer to a
feature of animating still images. I also wish to continue to
use LIVEPHOTO.COM and LIVEPHOTO.CA as domain
names to host websites where I advertise and promote
products such as SpinFun, Spin Explorer, Spin Explorer 2,
and future products that have the capability of adding life
or animation to still images.34
The software in Applicant’s description of goods and the software and app that
Opposer has developed and sells/licenses are so closely related, if not overlapping,
that we may consider Applicant and Opposer competitors for purposes of our analysis.
Thus, Opposer has a legitimate interest in preventing Applicant from gaining an
alleged unfair competitive advantage by maintaining a registration for a
purportedly generic or descriptive term for such software.

30 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶11 (39 TTABVUE 8).
31 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶¶10-13 (39 TTABVUE 8).
32 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶13 (39 TTABVUE 8-9).
33 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶¶14-15 (39 TTABVUE 9).
34 Opposer’s Testimony Decl. ¶16 (39 TTABVUE 9-10).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 13 -

Applicant contends that Opposer’s software does not compete with Applicant’s
software or serve as a substitute because Opposer’s software does not “simultaneously
take still photographs and short video clips and store them together as a hybrid
medium. … Rather, [Opposer’s] apps allow users to scan through a series of distinct
photographs and/or fast forward and rewind video with a spinning gesture.”35
However, the software does not have to be identical; it may be related. Eastman
Kodak, 23 USPQ2d at 1879; Binney & Smith, 222 USPQ at 1010. The software of
both parties creates the impression of moving photographs and, thus, has a similar
purpose or function.
Applicant asserts that Opposer has presented no evidence or testimony that
Opposer uses the term “Live Photos.”36 However, Opposer does not have to use the
term at issue to establish its entitlement to a statutory cause of action. Opposer has
a real interest in the proceeding because it has a present or prospective right to use
“Live Photos” as a generic or descriptive term to describe its software. Binney &
Smith, 222 USPQ at 1010. See also Vigilance Committee Inc. v. Ullenberg Corp.,
823 F.2d 490, 2 USPQ2d 2021, 2024 (Fed. Cir. 1987), on remand, 5 USPQ2d 1622
(TTAB 1987), rev’d, 853 F.2d 888, 7 USPQ2d 1628 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (in an opposition
based on Section 2(e), an opposer need only assert an equal right to use the mark).
For example, Opposer may want to advertise that his Spin Fun and Spin Explorer
apps create live photos.

35 Applicant’s Brief, p. 51 (74 TTABVUE 53).
36 Applicant’s Brief, p. 51 (74 TTABVUE 53).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 14 -

Applicant argues that Opposer’s failure to use the and
urls undercuts its position that it has a real interest in this proceeding.
[Opposer] has owned the domains since 2011, yet these
websites did not exist, i.e., had no content, until after
Apple’s high-profile announcement of the LIVE PHOTOS
feature. (48 TTABVUE 146, 148–149 at 131:13–20; 133:23–
134:5.) Instead, they automatically redirected visitors to a
different website, create.ca, owned by a different entity,
where they were listed for sale. (48 TTABVUE 152–153 at
137:14–138:4; 48 TTABVUE 471; 51 TTABVUE 5–11.) This
is in spite of the fact that [Opposer] purportedly created his
spin browser feature in or around 2012. (39 TTABVUE 5–
6 ¶ 6.).37
Opposer testified on cross-examination that he never tried to sell the domain
names or .38 Opposer explained that the webpage
where the url was offered for sale refers to the urls previous owner39
and that Opposer experienced technical difficulties getting the and
urls from redirecting to another website.40 Compare
Philanthropist.com, Inc. v Gen. Conference Corp. of Seventh-Day Adventists,
2021 USPQ2d 643, *7 (TTAB 2021) (petitioner’s “business practice is to register
domain names, hold them for a year or two, and let the registrations go un-renewed
if there is no re-sale interest.”).
Finally, Applicant argues that Opposer does not have a reasonable basis for its
belief that it will be damaged by the registration of Applicant’s purported mark LIVE

37 Applicant’s Brief, p. 51 (74 TTABVUE 53).
38 Opposer’s cross-examination testimony dep., p. 125 (48 TTABVUE 140).
39 Opposer’s cross-examination testimony dep., pp. 140-141 (48 TTABVUE 155-156).
40 Opposer’s cross-examination testimony dep., pp. 142-147 (48 TTABVUE 157-162).54).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 15 -

PHOTOS because Opposer has been offering his SpinFun and Spin Explorer apps for
sale since 2017 without having to use the phrase “live photo(s).”41 Because Applicant
argues in this proceeding that its purported mark LIVE PHOTOS is inherently
distinctive, Opposer has a reasonable basis for its belief that Applicant will prevent
Opposer from using the term “live photo(s)” as a generic or descriptive term.
We find that Opposer has a legitimate interest in preventing Applicant from
gaining an alleged unfair competitive advantage by obtaining a registration for a
purportedly generic or descriptive term for the applied-for software and that the
registration of the applied-for term will damage Opposer if we find it to be generic or
descriptive. Therefore, Opposer has proven its entitlement to a statutory cause of
action.
IV. Whether “Live Photos” is generic.
“A generic name—the name of a class of products or services—is ineligible for
federal trademark registration.” Booking.com, 2020 USPQ2d 10729, at *1. A generic
term “is the common descriptive name of a class of goods or services.” Royal Crown
Co. v. Coca-Cola Co., 892 F.3d 1358, 127 USPQ2d 1041, 1045 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting
H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. Int’l Ass’n of Fire Chiefs, Inc., 782 F.2d 987, 228 USPQ 528,
530 (Fed. Cir. 1986)). “The critical issue in genericness cases is whether members of
the relevant public primarily use or understand the term to be protected to refer to
the genus of goods or services in question.” Royal Crown, 127 USPQ2d at 1046
(quoting Marvin Ginn, 228 USPQ at 530).

41 Applicant’s Brief, p. 52 (74 TTABVUE 54).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 16 -

The Federal Circuit has set forth a two-step inquiry to determine whether a mark
is generic: First, what is the genus (category or class) of goods or services at issue?
Second, does the relevant public understand the term sought to be registered
primarily to refer to that genus of goods or services? Marvin Ginn, 228 USPQ at 530.
The relevant public’s perception is the chief consideration in determining whether a
term is generic. See Princeton Vanguard, LLC v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., 786 F.3d 960,
114 USPQ2d 1827, 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2015); see also Booking.com, 2020 USPQ2d 10729,
at *6 (“whether a term is generic depends on its meaning to consumers”). The parties
may introduce evidence of the public’s understanding of a term may from “any
competent source, such as consumer surveys, dictionaries, newspapers and other
publications.” Id. at 1830 (quoting In re Northland Aluminum Prods., Inc., 777 F.2d
1556, 227 USPQ 961, 963 (Fed. Cir. 1985)); accord Booking.com, 2020 USPQ2d 10729,
at *7 n.6.
Opposer’s burden is to prove the public understands “Live Photo(s)” is a generic
term by a preponderance of the evidence. Princeton Vanguard, 114 USPQ2d at 1830;
Magic Wand, 19 USPQ2d at 1554.
A. Genus of the goods.
With respect to the first part of the Marvin Ginn inquiry, we may define the genus
by the goods identified in the application: “computer software for recording and
displaying images, video and sound.” See In re Reed Elsevier Props. Inc., 482 F.3d
1376, 82 USPQ2d 1378, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (finding the description of services
properly defined the genus of the services); Magic Wand Inc. v. RDB Inc., 940 F.2d
Opposition No. 91239006

- 17 -

638, 19 USPQ2d 1551, 1552 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (a proper genericness inquiry focuses on
the identification set forth in the application or certificate of registration).
Applicant agrees that the description of goods properly defines the genus of goods
at issue.42 Opposer, on the other hand, argues that we are not constrained to limit
the genus to the description of goods in the application but that we look to the
evidence of record to help us accurately define the genus.43 See In re Katch, LLC,
2019 USPQ2d 233842, *4 (TTAB 2019) (genus includes activities rendered by
applicant even though those activities were not included in the identification of
services); In re DNI Holdings Ltd., 77 USPQ2d 1435, 1437 (TTAB 2005) (the Board
is not required to “turn a blind eye to the reality” of what goods applicant identifies
by the term at issue).
In DNI Holdings, the Board held that the genus of the services included wagering
on sporting events despite applicant’s omission from its recitation of services
activities related to wagering. Id. at 1439. See also In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d
1293, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1422 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (finding the Board did not correctly
describe the genus of goods and services offered by the applicant because the Board
failed to include the interactive design feature of applicant’s goods and services that
were not included in the identification of services); Reed Elsevier, 82 USPQ2d at 1380
(affirming that applicant’s provision of information regarding the law, legal news and

42 Applicant’s Brief, pp. 33-34 (74 TTABVUE 35-36).
43 Opposer’s Brief, pp. 12-13 (72 TTABVUE 19-20).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 18 -

legal services necessarily includes providing information about lawyers
notwithstanding applicant’s deletion of those services from its recitation.).
Applicant identifies its specimen of use filed with the application as a “screen shot
of applicant’s website showing use of the mark in close proximity to a buy now
button.” We reproduce below the specimen submitted by Applicant.

The specimen displays LIVE PHOTOS to identify “computer software for
recording and displaying images” and LIVE PHOTO to identify the megapixel
photograph produced by the LIVE PHOTOS software. There is no evidence in the
record indicating consumers perceive any material difference between the singular
LIVE PHOTO and the plural LIVE PHOTOS. See, e.g., In re Cordua Rests., Inc.,
823 F.3d 594, 118 USPQ2d 1632, 1637 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“While each trademark must
always be evaluated individually, pluralization commonly does not alter the meaning
of a mark.”); In re Belgrade Shoe, 411 F.2d 1352, 162 USPQ 227 (CCPA 1969); Wilson
Opposition No. 91239006

- 19 -

v. Delaunay, 245 F.2d 877, 114 USPQ 339, 341 (CCPA 1957) (“It is evidence that there
is not material difference, in a trademark sense, between the singular and plural
forms of the word ‘Zombie’ and they will therefore be regarded here as the same.”);
Swiss Grill Ltd. v. Wolf Steel Ltd., 115 USPQ2d 2001, 2011 n.17 (TTAB 2015)
(singular and plural of SWISS GRILL deemed "virtually identical"); Weider Publ’ns,
LLC v. D & D Beauty Care Co., 109 USPQ2d 1347, 1355 (TTAB 2014) (singular and
plural forms of SHAPE considered essentially the same mark). As discussed below,
the relevant purchasers are ordinary consumers and they are unlikely to notice this
minor difference.
Thomas La Perle, Applicant’s Legal Department Senior Director, testified that
Live Photo is the product of the Live Photos software.
The Live Photo is the product of the Live Photos software
feature. So it’s really the actual - - it’s the photo motion
memory that’s captured with Live Photos.44
___
I do agree that the Live Photos feature produces what
[Applicant] calls a Live Photo.45
Subsequently, La Perle explained, “Live Photo” is “really a file name associated with
the Live Photos software.”46

44 La Perle Cross-Examination Dep., pp. 14-15 (63 TTABVUE 18-19). See also id. at pp. 17
(63 TTABVUE 21).
45 Id. at p. 21 (63 (TTABVUE 25).
46 Id. at p. 28 (63 TTABVUE 32).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 20 -

There had to be a name for what the resulting product was
from the Live Photos feature, and it makes sense, from a
marketing perspective, to call it a Live Photo.47
We find that the genus of the services at issue is “computer software for recording
and displaying images, video and sound,” including the resulting images, video and
sound produced by the software. Because the resulting images, video, and sound
produced by the software are the purpose or key aspect of the software. See Royal
Crown, 127 USPQ2d at 1046 (quoting Cordua, 118 USPQ2d at 1637 (“[A] term can
be generic for a genus of goods or services if the relevant public … understands the
term to refer to a key aspect of that genus.”)). So, if the public understands “Live
Photo(s)” when used in combination computer software for creating moving images
or the moving images so created refer to type of software or the results of using the
software, “Live Photo(s) is generic. Royal Crown, 127 USPQ2d at 1047.
B. Relevant Public
The second part of the Marvin Ginn test inquires whether the relevant public
understands the term sought to be registered primarily to refer to that genus of
goods? The relevant public is the purchasing public for the identified goods. Sheetz of
Del., Inc. v. Doctor’s Assocs. Inc., 108 USPQ2d 1341, 1351 (TTAB 2013); see also
Booking.com, 2020 USPQ2d 10729, at *5 (“whether ‘Booking.com’ is generic turns on
whether that term, taken as a whole, signifies to consumers the class of online hotel-
reservation services”).

47 Id. See also id. at p. 39 (63 TTABVUE 43 (Opposer considers “Live Photo” to be a trademark
for a file format).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 21 -

Applicant’s LIVE PHOTOS software is a camera feature included in its iPhone
cellphones.48 Because cellphones are ubiquitous in today’s culture and marketplace,
the relevant purchasers are ordinary consumers.
C. Evidence
We now review the evidence showing how the relevant public perceives “Live
Photo(s).”
1. The Meaning of the Component Terms
The MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY (merriam-webster.com) defines “live,” inter
alia, as “abounding with life: vivid,” “being in a pure native state,” and “being in play
a live ball.”49 “Active” is a synonym for “live.”50
The MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY (merriam-webster.com) defines “photograph”
as “a picture or likeness obtained by photography.”51 “Photo” is a synonym for
“photograph.”52

48 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶10 (49 TTABVUE 4).
49 33 TTABVUE 7,
50 33 TTABVUE 8.
51 33 TTABVUE 20. The MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY (merriam-webster.com) defines
“photography” as “the art or process of producing images by the action of radiant energy and
especially light on a sensitive surface (such as film or an optical sensor).”
The Board may take judicial notice of dictionary definitions, including online dictionaries
that exist in printed format. In re Cordua Rests. LP, 110 USPQ2d 1227, 1229 n.4 (TTAB
2014), aff’d, 823 F.3d 594, 118 USPQ2d 1632 (Fed. Cir. 2016); In re S. Malhotra & Co. AG,
128 USPQ2d 1100, 1104 n.9 (TTAB 2018); In re Red Bull GmbH, 78 USPQ2d 1375, 1378
(TTAB 2006).
52 33 TTABVUE 20.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 22 -

There is no dictionary definition for the composite term “Live Photos.”53 However,
the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia (1981-2018)
(encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Live+Photos) defines “Live Photos as follow:
An iPhone camera feature starting with the iPhone 6s that
records three seconds of video (MOV) along with the still
JPEG photo.54
2. Applicant’s use of “Live Photos”
In addition to Applicant’s specimen of use submitted with its application, the
evidence we list below shows how Applicant uses “Live Photos.”
● In Applicant’s published application No. US 2017/0109596 A1, entitled “Cross-
Asset Media Analysis and Processing,” filed October 20, 2016 and published April 20,
2017 (subsequent to the filing date of Applicant’s application), Applicant explains

53 Opposer’s Cross-Examination Dep. Exhibit 7 (48 TTABVUE 378-439).
54 Opposer’s Cross-Examination Dep. Exhibit 8 (48 TTABVUE 440). See also id. Exhibit 9
(48 TTABVUE 441) based on the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia posted at
(yourdictionary.com).
We do not consider Opposer’s Cross-Examination Dep. Exhibit 10 (48 TTABVUE 443-443)
purportedly the results of Google search for “live photo” because Applicant did not include
the url or the date accessed and Opposer could not authenticate it. Opposer’s Cross-
Examination Dep., pp. 101-103 (48 TTABVUE 102-104). See also Trademark Rule 2.122(e)(2),
37 C.F.R. § 2.122(e)(2) (“Internet materials may be admitted into evidence under a notice of
reliance in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, in the same manner as a printed
publication in general circulation, so long as the date the internet materials were accessed
and their source (e.g., URL) are provided.”); Safer, Inc. v. OMS Investments, Inc., 94 USPQ2d
1031, 1039 (TTAB 2010) (if a document obtained from the Internet identifies its date of
publication or date that it was accessed and printed, and its source (e.g., the URL), it may be
admitted into evidence pursuant to a notice of reliance in the same manner as a printed
publication in general circulation in accordance with Trademark Rule 2.122(e)..
Opposition No. 91239006

- 23 -

that the asset analyzer may store a variety of different types of assets, including
“[s]tored ‘live photos,’ assets that have both still image portions and video portions.”55
● An excerpt from Applicant’s website (support.apple.com).56

● An excerpt from Opposer’s website advertising “Photos for macOS”
(apple.com/macos/photos/).57

55 34 TTABVUE 159 (Column 1 [0015]). See also 34 TTABVUE 160 (Column 2 [0023] and
[0026] referring to “live photo” in a descriptive or generic manner).
56 52 TTABVUE 49. See also 34 TTABVUE 149-152.
57 52 TTABVUE 57.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 24 -

● iPhone 6s – Technical Specifications webpage (support.apple.com) lists “Live
Photos with stabilization” as a feature of the camera function.58

● Applicant’s website advertising the iOS 11 operating system for iPhones and
iPads (apple.com/ios-11/).59

58 52 TTABVUE 158. See also “iPhone 6s Plus – Technical Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 165)
(same); “iPhone 7 – Technical Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 173) (same); “iPhone 7 Plus –
Technical Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 180) (same); “iPhone 8 – Technical Specifications”
(52 TTABVUE 187) (same)’ “iPhone 8 Plus – Technical Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 194)
(same); “iPhone X – Technical Specifications (52 TTABVUE 222) (same).
Applicant does not refer to LIVE PHOTOS in the “iPhone 11 – Technical Specifications”
(52 TTABVUE 200-206), the “iPhone 11 Pro – Technical Specifications (52 TTABVUE 201-
213), the “iPhone 11 Pro Max – Technical Specifications (52 TTABVUE 214-220), the “iPhone
XR – Technical Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 228-234); the “iPhone XS – Technical
Specifications” (52 TTABVUE 235-241); or the “iPhone XS Max – Technical Specifications”
(52 TTABVUE 242-248).
59 52 TTABVUE 275-276.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 25 -

● Applicant’s September 28, 2015 press release.
The new iPhones introduce Live Photos, which bring still
images to life, transforming instants frozen in time into
unforgettable living memories.60
● “Live Photos Called ‘Best New Feature,’ Composed of Separate JPG and MOV
Files,” MacRumors Newsletter (macrumors.com) (September 22, 2015)
The iPhone 6 and 6s Plus include several new camera
features that have been highly popular in reviews thus far;
but there’s also a fantastic update to the way photos are
displayed in the two devices. With Live Photos, exclusive
to the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus, a bit of motion is captured
alongside each photo, enabling short animation that bring
each image to life.61

60 52 TTABVUE 309.
61 53 TTABVUE 43.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 26 -

● “Further, each consumer purchasing one of these devices is likely to be exposed
to the LIVE PHOTOS brand name, as the name appears in multiple places when
operating these devices. For example, on an iPhone X operating the iOS 13.4.1
operating system, the LIVE PHOTOS mark appears in “Settings” in both the “Photos”
and “Camera” sections, as shown below:”62

62 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶43 (49 TTABVUE 19).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 27 -

● “Live Photos” also appears in the Photos app under “Albums,” as reproduced
below:63

3. Third-party use of “Live Photos”

Opposer introduced Internet evidence displaying third-party writers and
reviewers using “Live Photo” to refer to Applicant’s software and similar
software.64 We list below the Internet evidence introduced by Opposer:

63 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶44 (49 TTABVUE 19-20).
64 We did not include the webpage from the Huffingtonpost.ca (35 TTABVUE 14) because .ca
indicates a Canadian website and, thus, this website is directed to readers in Canada rather
than the United States.
We did not include “What is Live Photo and do I use it on my LG G7? because it posted on
lg.com.uk indicating that the website is directed to consumers in the United Kingdom rather
than the United States.
We did not include “Google picks the best Android apps of 2018; The apps to download now,”
in London Evening Standard (December 3, 2018) posted on advance.lexis.com (36 TTABVUE
Opposition No. 91239006

- 28 -

● “How HTC Invented the ‘Living Photo,’” LinkedIn website (linkedin.com)
(September 29, 2015).
Earlier this month, Phil Schiller [Applicant’s] marketing
chief, stood on stage and trumpeted a brand new feature in
the iPhone 6s called “Live photos.”
___
“I found that Live Photos quickly became an enjoyable,
integral part of shooting photos with an iPhone,” Brian X.
Chen wrote in his New York Times review.
“The absolute best thing about the 6s is Live Photos. While
capturing a still photo, it also captures a bit of live action.
They’re awesome for reliving fun moments, especially of an
active puppy or child,” said Joanna Stern in the Wall Street
Journal.
John Packzowski of Buzzfeed raved: “If I were a new
parent, I would upgrade to the 6s for the Live Photos alone.
It’s a powerful feature, powerfully executed.
Here’s the thing, though. The Live Photo concept isn’t new.
[Applicant] wasn’t the first to come up with the idea. They
weren’t even the second.65

123) because the London Evening Standard is obviously a London publication directed to
readers in the United Kingdom.
We did not include “Intex Aqua Power With 4000mAh Battery, Octa-Cor SoC Launched at
Rs. 8,444 posted at gadgets.ndtv.com (38 TTABVUE 11) because it is a press release
regarding the launch of the product in India.
We did not include “Micromax Canvas Unite 2 Review: A good buy for Rs 6,999” posted at
themobileindian.com (38 TTABVUE 14) because it is a product review directed to the market
in India.
We did not include “Karbonn Titanium Octane Plus Review: Specifications Aren’t
Everything,” posted on the Gadgets 360 website (gadgets/ndtv.com) (38 TTABVUE 37)
because it is a product review directed to the market in India.
We did not include “Launch: Micromax Unite 2 has 21 Languages. Is it as good as Moto E?”
The Indian Express posted at indianexpress.com (38 TTABVUE 48) because it is an article
directed to the market in India.
65 34 TTABVUE 33.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 29 -

___
So here’s the real story of how HTC invented the “living
photo.”66
● “Live Photos on Android Are Available in These Awesome Free Apps,”
PocketMeta website (pocketmeta.com) (March 26, 2016).67
When the new iPhones 6S and 6S Plus started shipping
with the 12-megapixel cameras and Live Photos, it was
crystal clear the live shots are becoming the next big thing
in the world of mobile cameras. … Without further ado,
here are some Android apps that offer live photos feature
or similar, or even better.68
Camera MX
… Give it a try, or read this detailed guide on how to take
live photos with it.69
___
Z Camera
I have no idea why the Z Camera does not put this feature
in your face, but it has a dynamic photo feature, which is
basically a live photo. In fact, Z Camera’s dynamic photo is
longer than iPhone’s live photos, and it saves as mp4 file
you can easily share with your desktop computer.70
___
Fyuse – 3D Photos

66 34 TTABVUE 34.
67 Opposer introduced a second copy of this website at 35 TTABVUE 54.
A similar but not identical article is posted on the Bee Bom website (beebom.com) (September
29, 2016) (34 TTABVUE 47-54 and 35 TTABVUE 45-52).
68 34 TTABVUE 38.
69 34 TTABVUE 39.
70 34 TTABVUE 40.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 30 -

Fyuse is different, yet awesome. It lets you shoot live
photos that include not only time, but also space.71
___
Phogy, 3D Camera
Phogy is similar to the above-mentioned Fyuse, in the way
that it lets you create spatial 3D live photos, and perhaps
it’s one of the go-to apps if you are looking to replicate that
coveted iOS functionality on your Android device. … The
free version has a 3-second limitation while the premium
version removes that cap, adding unlimited captures, the
option to create short mp4 videos, GIF images, set your live
photos as your wallpapers, HD photos, exposure time and
other goodies.72
___
Live Photos Galore – Honorable mentions
Vine …
Instagram …
HTC Zoe …
Google Camera …
Samsung Stock Camera …
What’s your app of choice when it comes to creating live
photos on Android?73
● “‘Live Photos’ Feature on Android,” MakesUseOf website (makesuseof.com)
(February 16, 2016).74
Photos don’t move. That’s what movies (short for “moving
pictures”) do. But the popularity of GIF-style images,

71 34 TTABVUE 41.
72 34 TTABVUE 42.
73 34 TTABVUE 43-44.
74 Opposer introduced a second copy of this website at 35 TTABVUE 112.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 31 -

introduced by [Applicant] as “Live Photos” (although
Cinemagraph feature on Windows Phone 8 predates this
by two years) means that everyone seems to want an
unnerving collection of Harry Potter-esque portraits on
their phones.75
___
Grahica Live Photo Maker
Perhaps the easiest to use, Graphica Live Photo Maker
pretty much does what the name suggests, launching
quickly with a menu offering the ability to take a Quick
Live Photo, create animations from previous photos on
your phone with Gallery Live Photo and also take a Live
Photo with Frame.
For the Quick Live Photo, simply tap the button, line up
the shot, and tap Start. As long as your subject is moving
slightly, you should get good results. With the live photo
captured, you can adjust the speed using the green slider,
and when happy, tap.76
___
Gif Me! Camera
… Creating a live photo from scratch is simple – just tap
the Camera icon, and press the capture button until you’re
done.77
___
Camera MX
Another free, ad-supported option, Camera MX is capable
of more than just live photos, and has a wide selection of
options available in the Settings screen.78

75 34 TTABVUE 56.
76 34 TTABVUE 57.
77 34 TTABVUE 58.
78 34 TTABVUE 59.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 32 -

● “Google Clips review: AI is not ready to be your photographer,” Mashable
website (mashable.com) (April 14, 2018).
By “moments,” I mean Clips captures “live” photos by
default, 7-second videos similar to the one’s [Applicant’s]
iPhones take. Google has done a decent job of making its
Photos platform … compatible with [Applicant’s] live
pics.79
● “The LG G6 features one of the best smartphone cameras,” Mobile Syrup website
(mobilesyrup.com).
The various modes attached to the Auto mode include past
staples like Popout, Panorama, and Time-lapse, and
include others like Snap (LG’s live photo feature), 360
Panorama and Food.80
● “How to get iPhone’s Live Photos on Android with Google Motion Stills (and
other apps),” The Android Soul website (theandroidsoul.com).
[T]here are certain software features that [Applicant]
reinvented before Android, and Live Photos is one of them.
If you don’t know what the Live Photos feature is, it’s a
feature that loops together multiple photos creating GIF-
style media. … While Google has already brought this
feature to the Pixel devices through Motion Shoot, the
company has also created the Motion Stills app which
brings Live Photos and much more to any Android device.
How to capture Live Photos on Android …
Click Live Photos with Google Motion Stills app …81
___
Alternative Android apps for Live Photos

79 34 TTABVUE 81.
80 34 TTABVUE 91.
81 34 TTABVUE 104-105.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 33 -

The brilliance of Google Play Store has allowed developers
to introduce even more ways to bring Live Photos to
Android and then some more. We’ve shortlisted some of the
most innovative apps we could find for creating Live Photos
on Android.82
● “Exclusive: LG G7 ThinQ Feature Dual 16 MP Cameras, Selfie Portrait Mode,
Oreo & More,” Android Headlines website (androidheadliines.com) (April 10, 2018).
3D Camera stickers, Live Photo, Portrait Mode, and a new
version of Graphy
If the typical intelligence features on offer with the
cameras are not for you, then this is only the start of what
the cameras offer, as the G7 is going to be packed to the
brim with additional camera software tweaks. … Adding to
its feature-rich repertoire, “Live Photo” will be offered on
the G7 so users can capture additional photos both before
and after the main photo is captured. The result of which
can then be viewed and/or shared as a short video, or just
used as a means to select the ‘best shot’ from a variety of
shots.83
● “Here’s Another Look At the LG G7 Thin Q,” Android Headlines website
(androidheadlines.com) (April 16, 2018).
The phone will continue the smartphone trend of dual rear-
facing cameras as well, and offer features such as Portrait
Mode, Live Photos, and 3D Stickers, all of which have been
popular offerings on other smartphones from different
brands.84
● “ZTE Shakes Up the U.S. Smartphone Market with Axon 7 Arriving Stateside
for $399.98,” Business Wire website (businesswire.com) (July 13, 2016).

82 34 TTABVUE 109.
83 34 TTABVUE 129-130. Opposer introduced a second copy of this website at 35 TTABVUE
153 and a third time at 36 TTABVUE 12.
84 34 TTABVUE 138.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 34 -

Beyond a Camera
The 20-megapixel rear camera is equipped with dual image
stabilization to prevent blurred images when capturing
real-life moments. Features such as Live Photo generate
animated images that can be shared via text, email, and
across social media.85
● “Enhance your Live Photos & sort albums in new ways,” Google website
(google.com).
Live Photos bring photos to life with sound and motion, but
can suffer from the everyday bumps and shakes that
happen when you take photos. Plus, they can be hard to
share with friends who don’t have an iPhone.
Now, with the latest Google Photos update on iOS, you can
make your Live Photos smoother and more shareable in
just a tap.
Using advances stabilization and rendering originally used
the Motion Stills app, Google Photos can freeze the
background in your Live Photos or create sweeping
cinematic pans, turning your Live Photos into beautiful,
captivating moments. Easily save it as a looping video and
share it with anyone.86
● “Lumia Cinemograph [sic] lets you capture live photo from Windows Phone,”
The Windows Club website (thewindowsclub.com).
What is Lumia Cinemagraph
In simple words, Lumia Cinemagraph is actually a camera
feature of Lumia mobiles. …
Lumia Cinemagraph helps users to create a 5 seconds [sic]
animated image. …

85 34 TTABVUE 145-146.
86 35 TTABVUE 41.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 35 -

Use Lumia Cinemagraph to capture live photo [sic].87
● “Lytro discontinues ‘living pictures’ image hosting service,” Tech Spot website
(techspot.com).
Lytro burst on the scene in mid-2011 with the introduction
of a promising photography technology that allowed users
to snap photos without having to first lock down the focus.
By capturing the light field, users could manipulate photos
after the fact and create “living pictures” that could be
focused at will.88
___
Had Lytro been able to somehow streamline its live photo
technique, it could have drastically revolutionized
photography.89
● “Bring photos to life: How to get [Applicant’s] Live Photos on Android,” the
Updato website (updato.com) (April 12, 2016).
Android fanboy, there is no comparison between Android
and iOS when it comes to functionality. However, even the
strongest of [Applicant’s] critics admit to how well the
brand can reinvent things, just as they have done with Live
Photos. However, getting Live Photos on Android [is] not
an impossible feat.
In fact, Live Photos are basically high quality .GIF files
that give you a short soundless video.90
● “How To Get iPhone’s Live Photos Feature on Android,” BeeBom website
(beebom.com) (September 29, 2016).

87 35 TTABVUE 62-63.
88 35 TTABVUE 71.
89 35 TTABVUE 72.
90 35 TTABVUE 80.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 36 -

[Applicant] introduced a new feature with the new iPhone
6s and 6s Plus this year dubbed “Live Photos”, which are
basically GIF images with sound. …
We are pretty sure we will see an implementation of Live
Photos on all Android devices soon but till then, you can
make do with these apps that let you capture Live Photos
with ease. As we mentioned, Live Photos are nothing but
GIF images with audio, so we are including apps that let
you create GIF images with audio. So, here’s how you can
get Live Photos on Android:
Apps that bring Live Photos feature on Android …91
● “Still Missing Live Photos on Your Android? Try These 3 Apps,” Gadget Hacks
website (android.gadgethacks.com) (January 16, 2018).
[Applicant] didn’t invent the concept of photos with videos
embedded (that credit goes to HTC and their Zoe feature),
but they sure did popularize this functionality when they
came out with Live Photos. If you’re jealous of iPhone
users, you certainly don’t need to be – there are several
ways to recreate Live Photos on Android.92
● “Zoe (live) Photos?” posted on the Android Central website
(forums.androidcentral.com).
returnmyjedi
I’ve been enjoying may Red U11 for a few days now
(especially the superb music playback and speediness it
exhibits compared to the S7 Edge it replaced) but I’m
missing the live photos. My wife had an M7 which had
HTC’s Zone photos, but I can’t find the option on the U11.93

91 35 TTABVUE 102.
92 35 TTABVUE 140.
93 35 TTABVUE 148.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 37 -

● “Live Photo,” on the Android Central website (forums.androidcentral.com).
heavyvino
What is the easiest way to get a single photo out of a live
photo series?
bbgsuser
By “live photo” do you mean the burst you get when you
hold down the shutter button?94
● A series of cellphone reviews posted on the Android Headlines website
(androidheadlines.com) referring to the term “Live Photos.”95 The following sentence
is representative: “Some of the modes include live photo, motion track photo, Face
Beauty, Panorama and others.”96
● “Missing live photos on your phone? Go With This Live Photos Android Guide!”
on the Android Portal website (theanroidportal.com).
Live photos are really great. However, this feature is
limited to only a few smartphone brands and models. …
In today’s new generation era, live photos are more
in trend. Everyone wants live photos feature in their
android phones but not all android users can enjoy
this feature in their phones. Well, you can always
enhance the photography of your smartphone
through camera settings. The basic concept of live
images is to take still pictures and quick videos
simultaneously which enhance the beauty and
quality of your photos.
There are many different ways to achieve this functionality
in your android device. In some android device[s] like
[Applicant’s] iPhone, HTC, etc. this feature is built by

94 35 TTABVUE 97.
95 35 TTABVUE 164-281 and 36 TTABVUE 28-53.
96 35 TTABVUE 185. See also 35 TTABVUE 214, 241, and 273 and 36 TTABVUE 45.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 38 -

default. What happens to the others with a smartphone not
supporting live photos Android feature by default?
There are a couple of great camera apps you can have on
your phone for better photography. However, here are the
best three apps popular for Live photos.
3 Best Apps With Live Photos Android Functionality97
___
From the all above options which one do you prefer? Well,
I would suggest you [sic] that Motion Stills app, that’s one
of the best apps among all. I feel it’s a perfect substitute for
live photos even if it doesn’t capture a still image too.98
● “LG V40 ThinQ Picks Up Five Cameras; You Can Pick up Preorder Goodies from
US Cellular,” on the Gear Diary website (geardiary.com) (October 4, 2018).
[Y]ou can create funky live photos as well, giving you lots
of ways to make your Instagram really pop.99
● “Apps for Creating Living Photos,” on the Push Interactions website
(pushinteractions.com).100
● “The History of Cinemagraphs Includes David Bowie,” on the Flixel website
(blog.flixel.com).
Cinemagraphs vs. Live Photos
Secondly – and this one draws the ire of the Internet’s
impassioned cinemagraph community – I would be remiss
to not bring up another variation of image capture: iOS
Live Photos feature, which is available on all new iPhone
models. When you take a picture through the Live Photo

97 37 TTABVUE 12.
98 37 TTABVUE 15.
99 36 TTABVUE 21.
100 36 TTABVUE 56.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 39 -

option, prior to the snap flash, the camera records approx.
1.5 second of video.101
● “HTC Desire 616 dual sim (Live photo demo) on YouTube (YouTube.com).102
● “How to Make Normal Photo to Live Photo [Live Effect] PixaLoop,” on YouTube
(YouTube.com) (July 3, 2019).103
● “mobile camera – live photo mode,” on YouTube (YouTube.com) (November 17,
2014).
this video shows you that what the effect has been occurred
[sic] in live photo mode. …
this features in Samsung models, micromax models, lava
models, sony, Motorola … etc.
● “How to backup live photos from the G7,” on the XDA Developers website
(forum.xda-developers.com) (September 27, 2018).
I decided to try out the live photos function in the camera
app as it could be fun to have some short video clips when
taking pictures of our dog etc104
● “P9 Lite – Live Photos?” on the XDA Developers website (forum.xda-
developers.com) (October 16, 2017).
Hello folks,
Does somebody know if Live Photos (like Samsung S7.8
and iPhone Camera) feature is available of P9 Lite?105

101 36 TTABVUE 83.
102 36 TTABVUE 88.
103 37 TTABVUE 6.
104 36 TTABVUE 98-99.
105 36 TTABVUE 107.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 40 -

● “Live Photos,” on the Android Forums website (androidforums.com).
I’ve released an app that allows you to view your photos (or
any folder containing images) on your wallpaper [illegible]
… It’s fully configurable, so you can set it up just the way
you want it. e.g. You can set the transition times, delay
[illegible]. Just search for “Live Photos” on the android
market to check it out.
It’s presently on sale at [illegible].106
● 12 news articles referring to the term “Live Photo(s)” posted on
advance.lexis.com.107 We have listed below three representative news article:
(1) “10 Best Android Fun Apps for Phones and Tablets,” Mobile Phone Advisor
(December 2, 2013).
You only have to point your Android cam and see LIVE
Photo impacts on the screen PRIOR TO you click the
button on your camera for taking the breeze and examine
the comical outcomes by yourself.108
(2) “ET review: InFocus M680,” The Economic Times (December 17, 2015).
The [Android] camera app offers modes like live photo,
motion track, panorama, multi angle and face beauty.
While there is no manual mode, you can still adjust
exposure, while balance and ISO in the settings before
taking a photo.109
(3) “Intex Launch 4.5-Inch Aqua Speed With A Focus On Photography And
Performance,” Android Headlines (March 4, 2015).
It appears that the device focus will be photography as
Intex have included several camera enhancement

106 36 TTABVUE 103.
107 36 TTABVUE 112-156.
108 36 TTABVUE 112. See also “Camera Fun Pro 4.0 for Android,” Mobile Phone Advisor
(September 1, 2012) posted on advance.lexis.com (36 TTABVUE 116) (similar statement).
109 36 TTABVUE 120.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 41 -

technologies including Panorama, Live Photo and Gesture
capture modes.110
● “Live photo from samsung nor works,” on the Google website
(support.google.com).111
● A tablet review posted on the Laptop Magazine website (laptopmag.com).
Cameras …
Click to Enlarge Camera options include normal and
beauty modes, live photo, panorama and multi view.112
● The Prestigio tablet user manual (prestigio.com) refers to the camera featuring
“Live photo mode – Take a live photo.”113
● “Review: The Cubot S168 Is The $90 Phone You Had Been Waiting For,” Giz
China website (gizchina.com).
Features like panorama, HDR, beauty shot (it has two of
these for some reason, with one letting you control the
amount of added fake beauty you wish to add) and live
photo mode are supported by the S168, good enough to keep
you interested in the camera for a while.114
● “Symphony Xplorer W75 Features and Specifications” DSpecs website
(dspecs.com) (September 2014) identifies the following camera features:
Fixed focus, LED flash, Panorama, Face beauty, Live photo
mode.115

110 36 TTABVUE 129.
111 37 TTABVUE 10.
112 38 TTABVUE 33.
113 38 TTABVUE 63.
114 38 TTABVUE 83.
115 38 TTABVUE 94.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 42 -

We list below copies of webpages Opposer introduced from the Google Play website
(play.google.com/store/apps/) advertising the sale of apps using the term “Live
Photo(s).”
● “Camera MX – Free Photo & Video Camera” app.
Live Photos for Android
Take moving Live Photos that can come alive when touched
– with “Live Shot”.
No longer decide whether to take a high-res photo or a
video. With “Live Shot” you got both!116
● Live Motion Picture – Live Photo & Video Animation app.
Live Motion Picture – Live Photo & Video Animation
is one of the smart way[s] to change your simple image into
an amazing live motion picture with editing many more
tools and you can also save this creation into application
personal gallery “My Creation” and share on social side
with simple click on your mobile screen.117
● Live Photo app.

Get ready for magic!
With this application you will be able to breathe life into
the characters depicted on special notebooks, albums,
notepads, puzzles etc. If you see the “Live Photo” logo of a

116 34 TTABVUE 100.
117 34 TTABVUE 168.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 43 -

red smiling hat on the product cover, it means its magical
and characters on it come to life!
You don’t have any products with the “Live Photo” logo?
Don’t get upset! Open the application and push the gift
button have a set of magical pictures sent to your email.
Animate them from your computer, print them out or share
them with friends. It is free!118
● Live Photo Editor app.

Live Photo Editor is cinemagraph maker creating app that
lets you add moving effects and elements to your photos,
and make moving pictures. Live Photo Maker is
Photomotion creating Living Photos, Moving Image,
Plotograph like Lumer moving photo motion Effects.119
● Live Photo on Motion app.

Live Photo on Motion: Cinemagraph Animation Effects is
one of the smart way[s] to change your simple image into

118 34 TTABVUE 172. See also liveanimations.org/en/marketing at 38 TTABVUE 7 stating
“Live Photo has been downloaded by over 1,000,000 children around the world,” with a
photograph of a little girl holding the logo of the smiling hat.
119 34 TTABVUE 176. Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer
posts this webpage. 53 TTABVUE 3.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 44 -

amazing live motion picture[s] with editing many more
tools and you can also save this creation into application
personal gallery “My Creation” and share on social
media.120
● Live Photo - Movense app.

Movense is a Live photos capturing and motion
photography based social network for users to express and
share their life events (parties) surroundings (travel,
animals, nature, food and fashion) and emotions (selfies) in
3D motion and then reverser playback on simple flip of
your wrist.
We call these Live Photo as Moves. MOVEs are motion
sensible pictures that allows you to sense motion on flipand
touch swipe gestures.
___
Recording a Move (Live Photos) is as simple as you snap
pics or record a video.121

120 34 TTABVUE 181. Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer
posts this webpage 53 TTABVUE 4.
121 34 TTABVUE 184. Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer
posts this webpage. 53 TTABVUE 5.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 45 -

● musical.ly Live Photo app.

musical.ly Live Photo – help you convert videos on
musical.ly to your wallpaper!
___
Install the musical.ly Live Photo according to the notice,
after you finish installation, go back to musical.ly and you
can convert videos to Live Photo!122
● PICOO Camera – Live Photo app.

Tired of vapid still photos or robot-like GIFs and which to
have a “Living” photos in which the view or people actually
moves? Then PICOO Camera is your choice.123

122 34 TTABVUE 189. Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer
posts this webpage. 53 TTABVUE 6.
123 34 TTABVUE 193. Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer
posts this webpage. 53 TTABVUE 9.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 46 -

● TikTok Live Photo app.

TikTok Live Photo – help you convert on TikTok to your
wallpaper!124
● VIMAGE app.

VIMAGE is a cinemagraph creating app that lets you add
moving effects and elements to your photos, turning them
into live pieces of art.125

124 34 TTABVUE 197. Opposer introduced a second copy of this advertisement at 36
TTABVUE 188.
Applicant introduced a webpage showing that the third party no longer posts this webpage.
53 TTABVUE 10.
While the webpage has changed, Opposer introduced a copy of the Tik Tok Wall Picture app
advertising “Save VIDEO as LIVE PHOTO” and “Choose one LIVE PHOTO from the
album.” 68 TTABVUE 6. A person providing a feedback comment complains that the app will
not let you “change your home screen or background screen into the live photo.” 68 TTABVUE
7. In addition, Opposer introduced a webpage from Yahoo! Style (ca.style.yahoo.com)
explaining how to save and transfer a TIK TOK video into a “live photo.” 68 TTABVUE 11.
See also 68 TTABVUE 17-21 (how to set a live photo as the lockscreen through the TikTok
app).
125 34 TTABVUE 201.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 47 -

● PixaMotion Loop Photo Animater & Photo Video Maker app.
Make live photos, live wallpapers, moving Backgrounds &
themes with animation effects using PixaMotion photo
animator.126
● Autumn Leaves Wallpaper app.
You might want to take a photo of your friends or family
and make it live wallpaper? Why not? Create you live photo
wallpaper with effects!127
Finally, developers for VUO – Cinemagraph, Live Photo & Photo in Motion app128
and Live Photo LWP app129 advertise the sale their apps on the APK Pure website
(apkpure.com). The Live Photo LWP advertisement states “Say goodbye to static
photo and say Hi to Live Photo.”
In opposition to Opposer’s evidence of third-party use of the term “Live Photos” as
a purportedly generic germ, Applicant introduced evidence of third-party use that
Applicant contends show “Live Photos” as a trademark for its software and the
resulting moving photographs resulting the use of the software.130 We list below
representative examples of Applicant’s third-party evidence:
● “[Applicant’s] new Live Photos feature turns your pictures into videos,” The
Verge (theverge.com) website (September 9, 2015).

126 37 TTABVUE 17.
127 38 TTABVUE 117.
128 37 TTABVUE 22.
129 38 TTABVUE 97.
130 53 TTABVUE 33-242. The evidence introduced by Applicant is not qualitatively different
than the evidence introduced by Opposer in that both sets of third-party use show a mixed
use of the term “Live Photo(s).”
Opposition No. 91239006

- 48 -

Phil Schiller announced a few new iPhone camera tricks at
today’s Apple event, but one of the strangest was
something called “Live Photos.” Think of it as a something
between automatic GIFs and short video clips.
Every picture you take with the new iPhone 6 of 6S Plus is,
by default, also a Live Photo. …131
● “How One Small Change To Apple iPhone 6 Revolutionizes Photography,”
Forbes (forbes.com) (September 15, 2015).
… I think that’s exactly what [Applicant] has done with the
camera feature on the iPhone 6s, more specifically
something it has branded Live Photos.132
___
Without doing anything different than you’d ordinarily do,
Live Photos extends the moment of the capture by
combining the best of still photography and video.133
● “iOS 11 livens up Live Photos with some new tricks,” CNET website (cnet.com)
(September 14, 2017).
When [Applicant] first launched its Live Photos feature, it
was a fun addition to iOS. The feature turns ordinary
photos into short videos, complete with sound and motion.
Starting with iOS 11, [Applicant] is adding some much-
needed capabilities to the Live Photos feature.134
● “iPhone SE: A Powerful New Smartphone in a Popular Design,” Business Wire
website (businesswire.com) (April 15, 2020).
iPhone SE uses Haptic Touch for Quick Actions — such as
animating Live Photos™, previewing messages,

131 53 TTABVUE 34.
132 53 TTABVUE 40.
133 53 TTABVUE 41.
134 53 TTABVUE 64.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 49 -

rearranging apps and more — as well as contextual
menus.135
● “Why now is the time for [Applicant] to bring Android-like features to iPhones,”
Tech Radar website (techradar.com) (June 23, 2020).
[Applicant’s] Live Photos feature, when launched in 2015,
felt very similar to the HTC Zoe functionality that never
took off on the handsets like the HTC One MB. But, rather
than being a complicated separate app, Live Photos still
exist prominently within the camera app, and are a nice
touch that users seem to appreciate.136
● “About Those Wireless Headphones, and Other Apple Accessories, The New
York Times (September 15, 2016).
Far from the measly fixed-focus, two-megapixel camera in
2007's original iPhone, the iPhone 6 line of 2014 had an
eight-megapixel camera with a five-element lens, f/2.2
aperture, a True Tone Flash, face detection and other
advanced features; the larger 6 Plus also provided optical
image stabilization. The iPhone 6s series bumped up the
camera resolution to 12 megapixels and added the
animated Live Photos feature and 4K video support – but
kept the five-element lens and f/2.2 aperture, while optical
image stabilization stayed exclusive to the Plus-size
version.137
● “Finding the Perfect Part of a Live Photo,” The New York Times (January 9,
2018).
Q. How can I retrieve a still photo from the 1.5 seconds of
an iPhone Live Photo before or after the official picture?

135 53 TTABVUE 108.
136 53 TTABVUE 115.
137 53 TTABVUE 213.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 50 -

A. Live Photos – [Applicant’s] format that captures a bit of
the subjects movement right before and after the “official”
picture – can be edited. …
Open the Photos app on the iPhone and find the image you
want to edit. Live Photos are also collected in their own
Live Photos album on the app’s Albums tab. After you open
the file, tap the Edit button in the upper-right hand corner
of the screen. The picture opens in the Edit mode, where
the familiar tools for cropping and enhancing the photo are
available.138
4. Third-party use of “Living Photos”

● “Taking Photos with HTC Zoe,” posted at blog.htc.com on March 25, 2013.
Life rarely happens one frame at a time, which is why HTC
developed our new UltraPixel camera with HTC Zoe. With
HTC Zoe, on the new HTC One, a simple click of the shutter
button captures up to 20 photos and a 3-second video
image, including the last second of images before you
tapped the picture button. … HTC Zoe turns your
smartphone into a living photo gallery of memories and
interests.139 (Emphasis added).
● “HTC One Review,” Photography Blog (photographyblog.com) (June 13, 2013).
HTC One is an Android smartphone with a 4-megapixel
cameral and a 28mm equivalent lens with a fast maximum
aperture of f/2 and optical image stabilizer. … The HTC
One also offers … the innovative Zoe shooting mode, which
takes up to 20 shots and a 3 second video to create a “living
photo” that you can share with friends and family.140
(Emphasis added).

138 53 TTABVUE 242.
139 34 TTABVUE 9. Opposer introduced as second copy of this website at 35 TTABVUE 132.
140 34 TTABVUE 15. See also “Break the Mold: The New HTC One from AT&T Brings Your
Mobile World to Life,” AT&T website (att.com) (February 19, 2013) (referring to “Living Photo
Gallery”) (34 TTABVUE 20); “Hands-On With Sleek and Stunning HTC One,” Popular
Mechanics (popularmechanics.com) (April 8, 2013) (34 TTABVUE 26) (referring to “‘living’
photos that move like the shots in a Harry Potter newspaper.”).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 51 -

● “Create Living Photos with PanoMoments,” Panomoments.com.
A New Kind of Photo Format
Bring moments and places to life with a new web-based
living photo format that allows you tell a visual story
through an association of space and time. … Simply upload
either a standard of 360 video, and you’ll have a living
photo that can be shred anywhere on the web.141
● “Everything you need to know about Living Images, Rich Capture and more on
your Lumia,” Windows website (blogs.windows.com).
Pioneered by Lumia, living images are magical photos that
extend the image with a bit of video.142
● “Video of Living Images up-close on the Nokia Lumia 930,” Phone Arena website
(phonearena.com) (April 3, 2014).
Living Images is a pretty cool feature that basically
incorporates small capsules of video just before or after a
still picture, then mixing some of that action with the still
image that was captured at the point of the shutter click.143
● “Cinemagraphs: An Introduction To Living Photos,” ISO website
(iso.500px.com).
First, there were photographs. Then, there came videos.
Next up: cinemagraphs, and exciting new medium that
pulls the best elements of its predecessors to advance
visual storytelling in one vivid, eye-catching package.
Think of them as living photos, composed like a
photograph, that contain a hint of repeating, video
motion.144

141 35 TTABVUE 8-9.
142 35 TTABVUE 22.
143 35 TTABVUE 76.
144 35 TTABVUE 89.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 52 -

● “Living Photos: Fstoppers Reviews Flixel Cinemagraph Pro for Mac,” on the
Fstoppers website (fstoppers.com) (April 3, 2014).145
● “Cinemagraphs vs. Still Photos in Social Advertising: Microsoft Case Study,” on
the Flixel website (blog.flixel.com).
We’ve all seen our fair share of Facebook ads and promoted
posts on Twitter that use still photos to attract the
attention of their audience. But what happens when you
switch the still for a living photo that share a unique story
and holds their attention?146
● “Flixel Living Photos,” on YouTube (YouTube.com) (February 2, 2016).147
● “Flixel Relaunches Living Photos App, Brings Professional Quality
Cinemagraphs to iPhone Users,” on the Betakit website (betakit.com) (July 19,
2013).148
Flixel Living Photos
Apple iStore #1 Photography App creates Living Photos.149
● “Cliplets Lets You Make Your Own Moving ‘Harry Potter’ Photos,” on the
Mashable website (mashable.com) (April 18, 2012).
Built in Microsoft’s Research Labs, Cliplets is actually a
freely downloadable Windows 7 app that lets you take a 10-
second video clip and then manipulate it so portions of it
run (usually in a loop) while the rest remains static. The
effect is often called a “cinema graph” and essentially
creates something akin to the living photos J.K. Rowling

145 36 TTABVUE 59.
146 36 TTABVUE 61.
147 36 TTABVUE 63. See also the Flixel app commercial “Flixel Living Photos” on YouTube
(YouTube.com) (March 19, 2012) (36 TTABVUE 70-77).
148 36 TTABVUE 67.
149 36 TTABVUE 67.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 53 -

introduced with her Harry Potter book series and then
filmmakers illustrated throughout all eight of the Harry
Potter films.150
● “Living Photo for Webs Design,” on YouTube (YouTube.com).151
● “Women with glasses – living photo” on YouTube (YouTube.com).152
● Three advertisements for apps using the term “Living Photos” on the Google
Play website (google.com/store/apps/).153
D. Analysis
As noted above, LIVE PHOTOS is generic if the people who use or take licenses
to use “computer software for recording and displaying images, video and sound” and
the resulting simulated moving photographs perceive the term “Live Photo(s),” as a
whole, as signifying the class of goods identifying the specific software and resulting
product.
“An inquiry into the public’s understanding of a mark
requires consideration of the mark as a whole. Even if each
of the constituent words in a combination mark is generic,
the combination is not generic unless the entire
formulation does not add any meaning to the otherwise
generic mark.” In re Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d 1293,
1297 [75 USPQ2d 1420, 1421] (Fed. Cir. 2005); see In re
Am. Fertility Soc’y, 188 F.3d 1341, 1347 [51 USPQ2d 1832,
1837] (Fed. Cir. 1999) (“[I]f the compound word would
plainly have no different meaning from its constituent
words, and dictionaries, or other evidentiary sources,
establish the meaning of those words to be generic, then
the compound word too has been proved generic. No
additional proof of the genericness of the compound word

150 36 TTABVUE 91.
151 36 TTABVUE 94.
152 36 TTABVUE 96.
153 36 TTABVUE 178-186.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 54 -

is required.”).
In re 1800Mattress.com IP LLC, 586 F.3d 1359, 92 USPQ2d 1682, 1684 (Fed. Cir.
2009); see also Booking.com, 2020 USPQ2d 10729, at *2 (“A term styled ‘generic.com’
is a generic name for a class of goods or services only if the term has that meaning to
consumers.”).
Applicant argues that the Internet documents Opposer introduced are hearsay
and, therefore, Opposer may not rely on them for the truth of what the authors write
or display in the documents.154 Applicant is correct and we do not rely on the Internet
documents or other evidence from printed publications for the truth of the matter
asserted therein. The probative value of these documents lay in the fact that we may
infer consumer perception through what the author wrote and, presumably, what the
readers read. See Spiritline Cruises LLC v. Tour Management Services, Inc.,
2020 USPQ2d 48324, at *2, *11 (TTAB 2020) (“[S]uch materials are frequently
competent to show, on their face, matters relevant to trademark claims (such as
public perception), regardless of whether the statements are true or false”; third-
party documentary evidence corroborates pervasive use by others in the industry)
(quoting Harry Winston S.A. v. Bruce Winston Gem Corp., 111 USPQ2d 1419, 1428
(TTAB 2014)); Ricardo Media Inc. v. Inventive Software, LLC, 2019 USPQ2d 311355,
at *2 (TTAB 2019) (“sometimes what Internet printouts and printed publications
show on their face is relevant to trademark cases, including likelihood of confusion
cases”); Robinson v. Hot Grabba Leaf, LLC, 2019 USPQ2d 149089, at *6, *7 (TTAB

154 Applicant’s Brief, pp. 35-36 (74 TTABVUE 37-38).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 55 -

2019) (third-party references are probative evidence that the relevant public
perceives the terms “grabba” and “grabba leaf” to, at a minimum, immediately convey
information about an ingredient or characteristic of tobacco, or tobacco products,
including cigar wraps; urban dictionary definition probative when considered in
context of third-party use), cancellation order vacated on default judgment, No. 0:19-
cv-61614-DPG (S.D. Fla. Dec. 17, 2019).
Applicant argues that Opposer’s evidence has little probative value because
Opposer has not introduced evidence regarding viewership or circulation, citing
Baroness Small Estates, Inc. v. Am. Wine Trade, Inc., 104 USPQ2d 1224, 1228 (TTAB
2012) (evidence of five different wineries using the term at issue of which four have
ceased such use lacks probative value where there is no evidence regarding the extent
of public exposure); In re Country Music Ass’n, Inc., 100 USPQ2d 1824, 1830 (TTAB
2011) (the relative obscurity of the third-party uses raises doubts about whether the
relevant public will perceive the phrase as generic); Zimmerman, 70 USPQ2d at 1435
(use of term in a legal opinion has little probative value in determining public
perception “given their limited circulation among members of the public.”).155
While we keep the lack of specific proof of viewership and circulation in mind, “the
magnitude of [the] evidentiary record is such that even allowing for these possibilities
[some of the entities are out of business, are small enterprises, are in remote
locations, or have reached only a miniscule portion of the relevant public], there is
still a significant body of evidence of third-party use.” In re Broadway Chicken Inc.,

155 Applicant’s Brief, p. 36 (74 TTAB VUE 38).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 56 -

38 USPQ2d 1559, 1565 n.16 (TTAB 1996). The third-party evidence is sufficient to
show a reasonable degree of public exposure to this type of Internet evidence .
Rocket Trademarks Pty Ltd., v. Phard S.p.A., 98 USPQ 2d 1066, 1072 (TTAB 2011).
In this regard, the Federal Circuit, in the context of determining priority, has
explained that we must consider the evidence as a whole and that we should not
specifically focus on each individual piece of evidence on a stand-alone basis to the
exclusion of what the entirety of the evidence shows.
The TTAB concluded that each piece of evidence
individually failed to establish prior use. However,
whether a particular piece of evidence by itself establishes
prior use is not necessarily dispositive as to whether a
party has established prior use by a preponderance.
Rather, one should look at the evidence as a whole, as if
each piece of evidence were part of a puzzle which, when
fitted together, establishes prior use. The TTAB failed to
appreciate this. Instead, the TTAB dissected the evidence
to the point that it refused to recognize, or at least it
overlooked, the clear interrelationships existing between
the several pieces of evidence submitted. When each piece
of evidence is considered in light of the rest of the evidence,
rather than individually, the evidence as a whole
establishes by a preponderance that West used the “FAST
EDDIE’S” mark prior to Jet’s admitted first use of the
mark.
West Fla. Seafood, Inc. v. Jet Rests., Inc., 31 F.23d 1122, 31 USPQ2d 1660, 1663 (Fed.
Cir. 1994) (when various documents point to the same results there is a sufficient
indication of reliability). Cf. Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enters. LLC, 794 F.3d 1334,
115 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“The ‘specifics’ as to the extent and impact
of use of the third parties’ marks may not have been proven, but in the circumstances
here [a considerable number of third-party use], Juice Generation’s evidence is
nonetheless powerful on its face.”).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 57 -

While there is voluminous evidence of third-party use of the term “Live Photo(s),”
neither party introduced survey evidence of consumer understanding, letters or
testimony from consumers, or affidavits from consumers showing generic use or user
understanding of “Live Photo(s).” Also, there is no testimony or evidence regarding
the practice in the industry for branding software functionality.
Applicant’s own use of the term “Live Photo(s)” includes substantial use to refer
to the simulated moving photograph resulting from the software, such that
consumers will perceive “Live Photo(s)” to be a thing (i.e., a generic term for simulated
moving photographs produced by an app). For example,
● When users encounter “Live Photos” in settings, as reproduced below, “Live
Photos” is displayed along with “Camera Mode,” “Filters & Lighting,” “Cellular Data,”
Auto-Play Videos,” “View Full HDR,” and “Selfies.” Consumers are unlikely to
perceive “Live Photos” as a source indicator while operating the software.156

156 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶43 (49 TTABVUE 19).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 58 -

● Applicant’s specimen is an excerpt from a webpage. It is not clear whether the
blue “Buy” tab in the upper right hand corner refers to LIVE PHOTOS brand software
or something else such as a camera app for a “Live Photo” function. In this regard,
“Live Photo” is listed as a camera feature in Applicant’s technical specifications along
with “12-megapixel camera,” “Autofocus with Focus Pixels,” “Optimal image
stabilization,” etc.157 An average consumer is unlikely to understand that “Live
Photo(s)” is a trademark when it is presented as part of a list of features including
other generic terms.
● The manner in which Applicant displays the term “Live Photo(s)” in its
advertising also leaves doubt as to its status. We note that Applicant highlights the

157 52 TTABVUE 158.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 59 -

trademark status of “Live Photo(s)” by presenting the “L” in “Live” and “P” in “Photos”
in upper case letters. However, Applicant’s use of the upper case letters “L” and “P”
is not so distinctive as to capture the attention of consumers’ eyes. There is no
testimony or other evidence as to how consumers perceive Applicant’s use of the term
“Live Photo(s).” Based on the evidence or record, including Appllicant’s other use of
upper case lettering, upper case lettering alone does transform a generic or
descriptive term into an inherently distinctive term. See In re Noon Hour Food Prods.,
Inc., 88 USPQ2d 1772, 1773 n.2 (TTAB 2008).
Assuming arguendo consumers understand the use of upper case letters signifies
trademark status,158 Applicant’s use of “Live Photo(s)” often signifies a thing, rather
than a source. In the excerpt from Applicant’s website (support.apple.com)
reproduced below consumers may perceive “Live Photos” as a software feature rather
than the source of the software feature.159 Applicant does not use “Live Photo(s)” in
the manner of a mark for its feature or app -- Live Photos app. Therefore, there is
nothing that engenders the commercial impression of “Live Photo(s)” brand software
on which consumers could base a perception of “Live Photo(s)” as a trademark.

158 As noted above, there is no direct evidence of consumer perception. In addition, we should
not place determinative weight on the use of upper-case or lower-case letters. See
Zimmerman v. Nat’l Assn. of Realtors, 70 USPQ2d 1425, 1434 (TTAB 2004).
159 52 TTABVUE 49. See also 34 TTABVUE 149-152.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 60 -

Likewise, in the excerpt from Opposer’s website advertising “Photos for macOS”
(apple.com/macos/photos/) reproduced below, the term “Live Photos” is part of the text
and it is not set apart from other terms such as “the Loop effect,” “Bounce,” and “Long
Exposure.”160

Based on Applicant’s use of the term “Live Photos,” consumers are not likely to
perceive “Live Photo(s)” as a source indicator or trademark for “computer software

160 52 TTABVUE 57.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 61 -

for recording and displaying images, video and sound” and the resulting simulated
moving photographs.161
On the other hand, there is ample unrebutted evidence of third-party app
developers using the term “Live Photo(s)” to identify or describe software used to
produce simulate moving photographs. For example,
● “Camera MX – Free Photo & Video Camera” app (“Live Photos for Android”);162
● Live Motion Picture – Live Photo & Video Animation app;163
● Live Photo app;164
● VIMAGE app;165
● PixaMotion Loop Photo Animater & Photo Video Maker app (Make live photos,
live wallpapers, moving Backgrounds & themes with animation effects using
PixaMotion photo animator.”);166
● Autumn Leaves Wallpaper app using (“Create your live photo wallpaper with
effects!”);167
● VUO – Cinemagraph, Live Photo & Photo in Motion app;168 and

161 Applicant’s use of “Live Photo(s)” in its patent application also supports this finding. 34
TTABVUE 154-166.
162 34 TTABVUE 100.
163 34 TTABVUE 168.
164 34 TTABVUE 172.
165 34 TTABVUE 201.
166 37 TTABVUE 17.
167 38 TTABVUE 117.
168 38 TTABVUE 97.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 62 -

● Live Photo LWP app.169
In addition, the record shows that at least five app developers that used the term
“Live Photo(s)” at one time. There is no record evidence as to why they stopped.170 We
list those app developers below:
● Live Photo Editor app;171
● Live Photo on Motion app;172’
● Live Photo - Movense app;173
● musical.ly Live Photo app;174 and
● TikTok Live Photo app.175
Finally, authors and reviewers use the term “Live Photo(s)” as a generic term. At
best, a few authors and reviewers may allude to “Live Photo(s)” as emanating from
Applicant but a reader (i.e., a consumer) would have to know that “Live Photo(s)” is
a trademark; a reader/consumer will not perceive “Live Photo(s)” as a trademark
based on encountering that term in third-party publications.176 As noted above,

169 38 TTABVUE 97.
170 There is no testimony or other evidence that Applicant lodged any objections to third-
party use of the term “Live Photo(s).”
171 34 TTABVUE 176.
172 34 TTABVUE 181.
173 34 TTABVUE 184.
174 34 TTABVUE 189.
175 34 TTABVUE 197. While this webpage has changed, the app developer continues to use
the term “Live Photo” in text. 68 TTABVUE 6.
176 We found only one document where a third-party writer referred to “Live Photos” as a
brand: “How One Small Change To Apple iPhone 6 Revolutionizes Photography,” Forbes
(forbes.com) (September 15, 2015) (“I think that’s exactly what [Applicant] has done with the
Opposition No. 91239006

- 63 -

Applicant’s own use of “Live Photo(s)” is ambiguous and, thus, does not clearly convey
to consumers that “Live Photo(s)” is a source indicator rather than the generic name
of a feature of Applicant’s camera app.
Third-party authors and reviewers are even less clear in their usage of the term
“Live Photo(s).” Applicant introduced into evidence a news article “Finding the
Perfect Part of a Live Photo,” The New York Times (January 9, 2018) to show that
“Live Photo(s) is not a generic or descriptive term. We produce below the beginning
of the article:
Q. How can I retrieve a still photo from the 1.5 seconds of
an iPhone Live Photo before or after the official picture?
A. Live Photos – [Applicant’s] format that captures a bit of
the subjects movement right before and after the “official”
picture – can be edited. …
Open the Photos app on the iPhone and find the image you
want to edit. Live Photos are also collected in their own
Live Photos album on the app’s Albums tab. After you open
the file, tap the Edit button in the upper-right hand corner
of the screen. The picture opens in the Edit mode, where
the familiar tools for cropping and enhancing the photo are
available.177
This author refers to “Live Photo(s)” as the common name of a thing (e.g., a feature,
format, or function) rather than as indicating a product emanating exclusively from

camera feature on the iPhone 6s, more specifically something it has branded Live Photos.”
53 TTABVUE 40).
.

177 53 TTABVUE 242.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 64 -

Applicant. For example, consumers may interpret “iPhone Live Photo” as “iPhone
(brand) Live Photo (product).”
The fact that the author used upper-case letters when referring to “Live Photo(s)”
is irrelevant in this article because the author uses upper-case letters when referring
to “Albums” and “Edit.” The reader will not take away that “Live Photos” is a
trademark based on the use of upper-case letters unless the consumer also perceives
“Albums” and “Edits” as Applicant’s trademarks. We find this highly unlikely. As
noted above, when “Live Photos” appears in the Photos app under “Albums,” as
reproduced below, “Live Photos” is listed as one of eight features, including “Videos,”
“Selfies,” “Portrait,” “Panorama,” “Slo Mo,” “Bursts,” and “Screenshots.”178

178 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶44 (49 TTABVUE 19-20).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 65 -

Applicant contends that Opposer “has not shown that the relevant public
understands software that records videos, image and sound together as ‘Live
Photo(s).’”179 We disagree. First, as discussed above, the genus at issue “computer
software for recording and displaying images, video and sound,” including the
resulting images, video and sound produced by the software.
Second, the evidence shows that consumers perceive “Live Photo(s)” as the
common name for a picture that incorporates video. For example,
● “Without further ado, here are some Android apps that offer live photos feature
or similar, or even better.”180
● “Perhaps the easiest to use, Graphica Live Photo Maker pretty much does what
the name suggests, launching quickly with a menu offering the ability to take a Quick
Live Photo, create animations from previous photos on your phone with Gallery Live
Photo and also take a Live Photo with Frame.” 181
● “By ‘moments,’ I mean Clips captures ‘live’ photos by default, 7-second videos
similar to the one’s [Applicant’s] iPhones take.182
The closest we come to direct consumer evidence is the excerpts from forums
introduced by Applicant and set forth below:
● “How to backup live photos from the G7,” on the XDA Developers website
(forum.xda-developers.com) (September 27, 2018).

179 Applicant’s Brief p. 38 (74 TTABVUE 40).
180 34 TTABVUE 38.
181 34 TTABVUE 57.
182 34 TTABVUE 81.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 66 -

I decided to try out the live photos function in the camera
app as it could be fun to have some short video clips when
taking pictures of our dog etc183
● “P9 Lite – Live Photos?” on the XDA Developers website (forum.xda-
developers.com) (October 16, 2017).
Hello folks,
Does somebody know if Live Photos (like Samsung S7.8
and iPhone Camera) feature is available of P9 Lite?184
● “Zoe (live) Photos?” posted on the Android Central website
(forums.androidcentral.com).
returnmyjedi
I’ve been enjoying may Red U11 for a few days now
(especially the superb music playback and speediness it
exhibits compared to the S7 Edge it replaced) but I’m
missing the live photos. My wife had an M7 which had
HTC’s Zone photos, but I can’t find the option on the
U11.185
● “Live Photo,” on the Android Central website (forums.androidcentral.com).
heavyvino
What is the easiest way to get a single photo out of a live
photo series?
bbgsuser
By “live photo” do you mean the burst you get when you
hold down the shutter button?186

183 36 TTABVUE 98-99.
184 36 TTABVUE 107.
185 35 TTABVUE 148.
186 35 TTABVUE 97.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 67 -

● “Live Photos,” on the Android Forums website (androidforums.com).
I’ve released an app that allows you to view your photos (or
any folder containing images) on your wallpaper [illegible]
… It’s fully configurable, so you can set it up just the way
you want it. e.g. You can set the transition times, delay
[illegible]. Just search for “Live Photos” on the android
market to check it out.
It’s presently on sale at [illegible].187
In addition, because “living” is a variant of “live,” the third-party use of “living
photo(s)”set forth above also corroborates that consumers understand “live photo(s)”
and “living photo(s)” to refer to photos that incorporate video.
Applicant argues that “Live Photo(s)” is not generic because, with the exception of
the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia, “Live Photo(s)” dictionaries do not define the
term. Although there is no dictionary definition for “Live Photo(s)” as a whole, that is
by no means dispositive. See In re Gould Paper Corp., 834 F.2d 1017, 1 USPQ2d 1110,
1111 (SCREENWIPE held generic even though there was no dictionary definition of
the compound term); Frito-Lay North America, Inc. v. Princeton Vanguard, LLC,
109 USPQ2d 1949, 1959 (TTAB 2014), rev’d on other grounds, Princeton Vanguard,
LLC v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., 786 F.3d 960, 114 USPQ2d 1827, 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2015)
(PRETZEL CRISPS found generic for “pretzel crackers” although no dictionary
definition exists for the combined term); In re Dairimetics, Ltd., 169 USPQ 572, 573
(TTAB 1971) (ROSE MILK refused registration on the Supplemental Register even

187 36 TTABVUE 103.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 68 -

though there was no dictionary definition of ROSE MILK). As noted above, the
Computer Desktop Encyclopedia defines “Live Photos) as an “iPhone camera feature.”
Applicant argues, in essence, that “Live Photo(s)” is not generic because it was the
first entity to use the term and “Live Photo(s) was not generic when Applicant
adopted it.188 First, we are not limited to determining the status of a term as of the
date it was first adopted. “To determine if a mark is generic, we examine the evidence
up through the time of trial.” Alcatraz Media Inc. v. Chesapeake Marine Tours, Inc.,
107 USPQ2d 1750, 1758 (TTAB 2013).
In addition, the fact that an applicant may be the first or only user of a generic
designation does not justify registration if the only significance conveyed by the term
is that of a category of goods. In re Empire Tech, Dev. LLC, 123 USPQ2d 1544, 1549
(TTAB 2017) (citing In re Greenliant Systems Ltd., 97 USPQ2d 1078, 1083 (TTAB
2010). See also In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith, Inc., 828 F.2d 1567,
1569, 4 USPQ2d 1141, 1142 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (“To allow trademark protection for
generic terms, i.e., names which describe the genus of goods being sold, even when
these have become identified with a first user, would grant the owner of the mark a
monopoly, since a competitor could not describe his goods as what they are.”).
Applicant cites three news articles to support its contention that “Live Photo(s)”
was not generic when it first adopted the term. We reproduce below excerpts from the
articles:

188 Applicant’s Brief, p. 39 (74 TTABVUE 41).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 69 -

● “[Applicant’s] new Live Photos feature turns your pictures into videos,” The
Verge website (theverge.com) (September 9, 2015).189
Phil Schiller announced a few new iPhone camera tricks at
today’s Apple event, but one of the strangest was
something called “Live Photos.” Think of it as a something
between automatic GIFs and short video clips.
Every picture you take with the new iPhone 6Sor 6S Plus
is, by default, also a Live Photo. The camera app captures
a second and a half on either side of the photo that you
take, and when you tap the photo it will animate. …
Apple says that Live Photos will be supported across all
Apple products, showed off being used as wallpaper on your
iPhone or Apple Watch. It’s not necessarily a new idea –
HTC did this with its “Zoe” camera mode, and others have
tried similar feats – but Apple has the advantage of
building Live Photos into one of the world’s most popular
phones (and cameras).190
● “Why We Keep Buying Each New iPhone,” The Wall Street Journal (September
23, 2015).191
And now, on the iPhone 6s, there’s Live Photos, a groovy
new tool for self-expression. It captures a three-second
burst of video around a photo. But you can only share these
with other Apple device owners.192
● “Review: Apple’s iPhone 6s And 6s Plus Go ‘Tick’,” on the Tech Crunch website
(techcrunch.com).193

189 53 TTABVUE 33.
190 53 TABVUE 34-35.
191 53 TTABVUE 149.
192 53 TTABVUE 150.
193 53 TTABVUE 454.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 70 -

Webpage image

Sights And Sounds
Live Photos are not really a new format. The images, which
are accompanied by 3 seconds of video (split before and
after your shot) are stored as a .jpg file on your iPhone. …
The appearance to the user is seamless, as iOS sees that
they are connected and presents them as on ‘Live Photo.’
In my experience, Live Photos work best when capturing
ambience, not action.194
___
Until Live Photos, there was no easy way for any normal
person to share both of those things at once in one go – a
crystal-clear still image, with a sense of place attached. I
could go on about Live Photos, I find them to be very, very
powerful, but I think that the best uses of them are still
undiscovered.195
These three articles refer to “Live Photo(s)” as a thing (“something between
automatic GIFs and short video clips,” “a groovy new tool for self-expression,” and “a
new format”). Consumers reading about Applicant’s new “Live Photo(s)” feature will
not perceive “Live Photos” as a trademark based on the above-noted news articles.

194 53 TTABVUE 51-52.
195 53 TTABVUE 53-54.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 71 -

We find that the evidence of record in its entirety proves that consumers perceive
the term “Live Photo(s)” as a generic term for “computer software for recording and
displaying images, video and sound,” including the resulting images, video and sound
produced by the software. As Judge Rich explained in In re Abcor Development Corp.,
588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215, 219, 219 (CCPA 1978) (Rich, J., concurring) (emphasis
in original), a term that immediately and unequivocally describes the purpose and
function of appellant’s goods is a name for those goods, for “[t]hat is what names do.
They tell you what the thing is.” The evidentiary record as a whole proves that
consumers perceive the term “Live Photo(s)” as a thing, not a source.
We sustain the opposition on the ground that the term “Live Photo(s)” used in
connection with “computer software for recording and displaying images, video and
sound,” including the resulting images, video and sound produced by the software is
generic.
V. Whether “Live Photos” is merely descriptive.
We now address the alternative ground of opposition to register LIVE PHOTOS
— that, if LIVE PHOTOS is not generic, it nonetheless is merely descriptive and has
not acquired distinctiveness. Although we have found LIVE PHOTOS to be generic
for “computer software for recording and displaying images, video and sound,”
including the resulting images, video and sound produced by the software, we analyze
this alternative ground in the event a reviewing court finds on appeal that LIVE
PHOTOS is not generic.
Implicit in our holding that the evidence before us establishes that “Live Photos”
is generic for “computer software for recording and displaying images, video and
Opposition No. 91239006

- 72 -

sound,” including the resulting images, video and sound produced by the software is
a finding that “Live Photos” is not only merely descriptive of Applicant’s identified
goods, but is highly descriptive of the goods, under Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2(e)(1). “The generic name of a thing is in fact the ultimate in
descriptiveness.” Bellsouth Corp. v. DataNational Corp. 60 F.3d 1564, 35 USPQ2d
1554, 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (quoting Marvin Ginn, 228 USPQ at 530); Weiss Noodle,
129 USPQ at 413 (“The name of a thing is the ultimate in descriptiveness. … It is
immaterial that the name is in a foreign language.”). See also In re Automated Mktg.
Sys., Inc., 873 F.2d 1451, 11 USPQ2d 1319, 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (after finding
SALES FOLLOW-UP for soliciting repeat and referral business for automobile
dealership services generic, “the highly descriptive nature of ‘SALES FOLLOW-UP’
outweighed [applicant’s] evidence of acquired distinctiveness.”); In re Noon Hour
Food Prods., Inc., 88 USPQ2d 1172 (TTAB 2008) (finding, despite applicant’s claim
of use in commerce for almost one hundred years, as well as an “inadvertently
cancelled” seventy-year-old registration for the mark BOND-OST for cheese, current
evidence clearly showed the mark was generic for the goods, and assuming arguendo
that BOND-OST is not generic, that applicant had failed to establish acquired
distinctiveness of the highly descriptive mark); In re Waverly Inc., 27 USPQ2d 1620,
1623 (TTAB 1993) (finding MEDICINE not generic, but a highly descriptive term that
had acquired distinctiveness, for medical journals).
Nevertheless, Applicant contends that “Live Photos” is inherently distinctive – at
a minimum suggestive of the applied-for-goods – and therefore is entitled to
Opposition No. 91239006

- 73 -

registration without any showing of secondary meaning. Accordingly, if a reviewing
court on appeal finds “Live Photos” is not generic, then it is incumbent upon us to
determine whether “Live Photos” is merely descriptive.
In the absence of acquired distinctiveness, Section 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act
precludes registration of a mark on the Principal Register that, when used in
connection with an applicant’s goods, is merely descriptive of them. 15 U.S.C.
§ 1052(e)(1). “A mark is merely descriptive if it immediately conveys information
concerning a feature, quality, or characteristic of the goods or services for which
registration is sought.” Real Foods Pty Ltd. v. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc., 906 F.3d 965,
128 USPQ2d 1370, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (quoting In re N.C. Lottery, 866 F.3d 1363,
123 USPQ2d 1707, 1709 (Fed. Cir. 2017)).
We “must consider the mark as a whole and do so in the context of the goods
or services at issue.” DuoProSS Meditech Corp. v. Inviro Med. Devices, Ltd.,
695 F.3d 1247, 103 USPQ2d 1753, 1757 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (emphasis added); In re
Calphalon Corp., 122 USPQ2d 1153, 1162 (TTAB 2017). “Whether consumers could
guess what the product is from consideration of the mark alone is not the test.” In re
Am. Greetings Corp., 226 USPQ 365, 366 (TTAB 1985). Rather, “the question is
whether someone who knows what the goods and services are will understand the
mark to convey information about them.” DuoProSS, 103 USPQ2d at 1757 (quoting
In re Tower Tech, Inc., 64 USPQ2d 1314, 1316-17 (TTAB 2002)).
The evidence discussed above used in analyzing whether “Live Photo(s)” is a
generic term also shows that “Live Photos” is merely descriptive when used in
Opposition No. 91239006

- 74 -

connection with “computer software for recording and displaying images, video and
sound.” The evidence of third-party use shows that “Live Photos” is merely descriptive
because it demonstrates that “Live Photos” has a normally understood and recognized
descriptive meaning. See Specialty Brands, Inc. v. Coffee Bean Distrib., Inc., 748 F.2d
669, 223 USPQ 1281, 1285 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (“third-party usage can demonstrate the
ordinary dictionary meaning of a term or the meaning of a term to those in the trade”)
(citing Tektronix, Inc. v. Daktronics, Inc., 534 F.2d 915, 189 USPQ 693, 694-95 (CCPA
1976)); In re Abcor Dev. Corp., 588 F.2d 811, 200 USPQ 215, 218 (CCPA 1978)
(“Evidence of the context in which a mark is used on labels, packages, or in
advertising material directed to the goods is probative of the reaction of prospective
purchasers to the mark.”). Cf. Juice Generation, 115 USPQ2d at 1674 (third-party
use and registration of a term may be an indication that a term has a suggestive or
descriptive connotation in a specific industry); Primrose Retirement Communities,
LLC v. Edward Rose Senior Living, LLC, 122 USPQ 1030, 1036 (TTAB 2016)
(evidence of third-party use in the relevant context may show that a term “may have
a normally understood and well-recognized descriptive or suggestive meaning”).
We find that consumers commonly use “Live Photos” to describe “computer
software for recording and displaying images, video and sound” and the simulated
moving photographs the software produces and, therefore, “Live Photos” is not only
merely descriptive but it is highly descriptive of such goods.
VI. Acquired Distinctiveness
Pursuant to Section 2(f) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(f), matter that is
merely descriptive under Section 2(e)(1) may nonetheless be registered on the
Opposition No. 91239006

- 75 -

Principal Register if it “has become distinctive of the applicant’s goods in commerce.”
Thus, assuming that Applicant’s mark is not generic, Applicant may register its mark
on the Principal Register if Applicant proves that the merely descriptive matter has
acquired distinctiveness (also known as “secondary meaning”) as used on Applicant’s
goods in commerce. See Coach Servs. Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356,
101 USPQ2d 1713, 1728-30 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Apollo Med. Extrusion Techs.,
123 USPQ2d at 1848.
We generally understand acquired distinctiveness to mean an acquired “mental
association in buyers’ minds between the alleged mark and a single source of the
product.” Apollo Med. Extrusion Techs., 123 USPQ2d at 1848 (quoting 2 MCCARTHY
ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION § 15:5 (4th ed., June 2017 Update)). In
analyzing whether the record shows “Live Photos” is generic or merely descriptive
with a high degree of descriptiveness, we considered all of the evidence of record
touching on the public perception of that term as discussed above and more fully
below.
An applicant seeking registration of a mark under Section 2(f) bears the ultimate
burden of establishing acquired distinctiveness. See In re Becton, Dickinson & Co.,
675 F.3d 1368, 102 USPQ2d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Yamaha Int’l Corp. v.
Hoshino Gakki Co., 840 F.2d 1572, 1577, 6 USPQ2d 1001, 1005-06 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
As noted above, Applicant’s burden increases with the level of descriptiveness.
Steelbuilding.com, 415 F.3d 1293, 75 USPQ2d 1420, 1424 (Fed. Cir. 2005). See also
In re Bos. Beer Co. L.P., 198 F.3d 1370, 53 USPQ2d 1056, 1058 (Fed. Cir. 1999)
Opposition No. 91239006

- 76 -

(“[C]onsidering the highly descriptive nature of the proposed mark, [Applicant] has
not met its burden to show that the proposed mark has acquired secondary
meaning.”).
Because we have found that the term “Live Photos” is highly descriptive of
Applicant’s goods, Applicant’s burden of establishing acquired distinctiveness under
Section 2(f) is commensurately high. See Steelbuilding.com, 75 USPQ2d at 1424; In
re Bongrain Int’l Corp., 894 F.2d 1316, 13 USPQ2d 1727, 1729 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re
Greenliant Sys. Ltd., 97 USPQ2d, 1078, 1085 (TTAB 2010).
To establish acquired distinctiveness, Applicant must demonstrate that relevant
consumers perceive the proposed mark at issue as identifying the producer or source
of the product. See Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Bros., 529 U.S. 205, 54 USPQ2d
1065, 1068 (2000) (acquired distinctiveness exists “when, in the minds of the public,
the primary significance of a [proposed mark] is to identify the source of the product
rather than the product itself”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted);
Stuart Spector Designs Ltd. v. Fender Musical Instruments Corp., 94 USPQ2d 1549,
1554 (TTAB 2009) (“An applicant must show that the primary significance of the
product configuration in the minds of consumers is not the product but the source of
that product in order to establish acquired distinctiveness.”).
Applicants may show acquired distinctiveness by direct or circumstantial
evidence. Schlafly v. Saint Louis Brewery, LLC, 909 F.3d 420, 128 USPQ2d 1739,
1743 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (“The Board and courts have recognized that both direct and
circumstantial evidence may show secondary meaning.”) (citation omitted); In re
Opposition No. 91239006

- 77 -

Ennco Display Sys., 56 USPQ2d 1279, 1283 (TTAB 2000). Direct evidence includes
testimony, declarations or surveys of consumers as to their state of mind. Ennco
Display Sys., 56 USPQ2d at 1283. Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand, is
evidence from which we may infer a consumer association, such as years of use, prior
registrations, extensive sales and advertising, unsolicited media coverage, and any
similar evidence showing wide exposure of the mark to consumers. Id.; see also Tone
Bros. v. Sysco Corp., 28 F.3d 1192, 31 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (listing, as
examples of circumstantial evidence, advertising, sales figures, and intentional
copying by competitors).
In particular, the Federal Circuit set out factors to consider in assessing whether
a mark has acquired distinctiveness, stating as follows:
[T]he considerations to be assessed in determining whether
a mark has acquired secondary meaning can be described
by the following six factors: (1) association of the
trade[mark] with a particular source by actual purchasers
(typically measured by customer surveys); (2) length,
degree, and exclusivity of use; (3) amount and manner of
advertising; (4) amount of sales and number of customers;
(5) intentional copying; and (6) unsolicited media coverage
of the product embodying the mark.
Converse, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 909 F.3d 1110, 128 USPQ2d 1538, 1546 (Fed.
Cir. 2018). See also In re SnoWizard, Inc., 129 USPQ2d 1001, 1004-05 (TTAB 2018).
On this list, no single factor is determinative and “[a]ll six factors are to be weighed
together in determining the existence of secondary meaning.” In re Guaranteed Rate,
Inc., 2020 USPQ2d 10869, at *3 (TTAB 2020) (quoting Converse, 128 USPQ2d at
1546); In re Tires, Tires, Tires Inc., 94 USPQ2d 1153, 1157 (TTAB 2009). See also
Ennco Display Sys., 56 USPQ2d at 1283 (“Direct evidence [of acquired
Opposition No. 91239006

- 78 -

distinctiveness] includes actual testimony, declarations or surveys of consumers as
their state of mind. Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand, is evidence from
which consumer association might be inferred, such as years of use, extensive amount
of sales and advertising, and any similar evidence showing wide exposure of the mark
to consumers.”).
1. Association of the proposed trademark with a particular source by
actual purchasers (typically measured by customer surveys).

There is no testimony or other evidence by actual purchasers, nor is there a
consumer survey.
2. Length, degree, and exclusivity of use.
On September 9, 2015, Applicant introduced the iPhone 6 and the “Live Photos”
feature and first offered it for sale on September 25, 2015.196 Applicant has
continuously used “Live Photos,” in part, by preloading it in every iPhone model as
well as on iPad devices.197 However, as discussed above, consumers will perceive
“Live Photos” to be a generic term based on the manner in which Applicant uses it on
its iPhone cellphone.
Applicant’s use of the term “Live Photos” has not been exclusive. As discussed
above in our analysis of whether “Live Photos” is generic, we found unrebutted
evidence of third-party app developers using the term “Live Photo(s)” to identify or
describe software used to produce simulate moving photographs. For example,

196 La Perle Cross-examination Dep., p. 12 (63 TTABVUE 16); La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶¶10,
17 (49 TTABVUE 4, 6).
197 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶¶40, 41 (49 TTABVUE 18).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 79 -

● “Camera MX – Free Photo & Video Camera” app (“Live Photos for Android”);198
● Live Motion Picture – Live Photo & Video Animation app;199
● Live Photo app;200
● VIMAGE app;201
● PixaMotion Loop Photo Animater & Photo Video Maker app (Make live photos,
live wallpapers, moving Backgrounds & themes with animation effects using
PixaMotion photo animator.”);202
● Autumn Leaves Wallpaper app using (“Create your live photo wallpaper with
effects!”);203
● VUO – Cinemagraph, Live Photo & Photo in Motion app;204 and
● Live Photo LWP app.205
In addition, the record shows that at least five app developers used the term “Live
Photo(s)” at one time. We list those app developers below:
● Live Photo Editor app;206

198 34 TTABVUE 100.
199 34 TTABVUE 168.
200 34 TTABVUE 172.
201 34 TTABVUE 201.
202 37 TTABVUE 17.
203 38 TTABVUE 117.
204 38 TTABVUE 97.
205 38 TTABVUE 97.
206 34 TTABVUE 176.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 80 -

● Live Photo on Motion app;207’
● Live Photo - Movense app;208
● musical.ly Live Photo app;209 and
● TikTok Live Photo app.210
Finally, the record shows that third-party writers and reviewers use the term
“Live Photos” to describe apps that produce moving images.
We find that Applicant has not made substantially exclusive use of the term “Live
Photos.”
3. Amount and manner of advertising.
[Applicant] advertises and markets its products
extensively throughout the United States across a range of
mediums, including TV, print, billboards, and through its
website at apple.com. These advertising efforts have
included the promotion of the LIVE PHOTOS software
feature throughout the United States via a wide variety of
advertising channels.211
Applicant advertises the “Live Photos” software feature in connection with its
iPhone, iPad, and other devices “with direct reference to core features within those
devices, including the LIVE PHOTOS software feature.”212 However, Applicant

207 34 TTABVUE 181.
208 34 TTABVUE 184.
209 34 TTABVUE 189.
210 34 TTABVUE 197. While this webpage has changed, the app developer continues to use
the term “Live Photo” in text. 68 TTABVUE 6.
211 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶24 (49 TTABVUE 10).
212 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶34 (49 TTABVUE 14).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 81 -

preinstalls “Live Photos” on Applicant’s iPhones,213 it is not clear whether and the
extent to which they are aware of the “Live Photos” software and whether it plays a
role in their decision to purchase an iPhone.
La Perle specifically referred to the advertisement reproduced below as
“highlighting” Live Photos:214

213 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶34 (49 TTABVUE 14).
214 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶35 Exhibit 31 (49 TTABVUE 14, 15 and 52).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 82 -

While Applicant identifies “Live Photos” as an iPhone feature, there is nothing
that emphasizes that it is a trademark. It is displayed in the same way Applicant
displays “Faster WiFi,” “4K Video,” “Better Selfies,” and “Stronger Glass.” Applicant
does not use this advertisement to show trademark use of “Live Photos.”
La Perle also referred to the promotion reproduced below:215

Applicant’s use of “Live Photos” conveys that “Live Photos” is a camera feature; it
does not emphasize that “Live Photos” is a trademark for Applicant’s camera
software.

215 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶36 (49 TTABVUE 15-16) and 52 TTABVUE 275-276.
Opposition No. 91239006

- 83 -

Finally, La Perle refers to “Live Photos” as presented in Applicant’s press release
of the “iOS 11” operating system.216 We reproduce below the relevant excerpt from
the advertisement217 as presented in the La Perle declaration:218

216 53 TTABVUE 301-308.
217 53 TTABVUE 303.
218 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶37 (49 TTABVUE 16-17).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 84 -

This excerpt is on one-half page of a seven-page press release. Applicant buries it
in the text and fails to highlight or emphasize the term so that consumers recognize
it as a trademark. Applicant’s use of “Live Photos” fails to convey that “Live Photos”
is a trademark.
Applicant’s extensive advertising and marketing of its iPhone and iPad devices
features “Live Photos” as a feature of the devices. Applicant’s advertising and
marketing does not promote “Live Photos” as a brand of software exclusively
associated with Applicant.
4. Amount of sales and number of customers.
“On September 28, 2015, only three days after the iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus
devices went on sale, [Applicant] reported that it had sold more than 13 million of the
6s and 6s Plus models, which were sold with the LIVE PHOTOS software pre-loaded,
and that the sales had been phenomenal, exceeding any previous first weekend sales
results in [Applicant’s] history.”219 Sales of the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus also
included the LIVE PHOTOS software feature and resulted in record quarterly sales.
“Specifically, in the three months following the release of the iPhone 7, [Applicant]
sold 78.3 million iPhone devices worldwide.”220 Between 2015 and 2019, Applicant
sold hundreds of millions of iPhones with the “Live Photos” feature globally
generating hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue.221 Applicant’s sales in the U.S.

219 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶21 (49 TTABVUE 21).
220 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶48 (49 TTABVUE 21).
221 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶50 (49 TTABVUE 22).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 85 -

are approximately 40-45% of its worldwide sales.222 Applicant’s sales figures for its
iPad devices featuring the “Live Photos” feature are equally impressive.223
La Perle’s testimony regarding Applicant’s phenomenal sales tells us that
Applicant’s iPhones and iPads are incredibly popular. It does not tell us how
consumers perceive the term “Live Photos,” what percentage of consumers are aware
that “Live Photos” is a feature of their iPhone or iPad device, or whether the “Live
Photos” feature was a factor in their purchasing decision. Because Applicant
preinstalls “Live Photos” on its iPhones,224 “Live Photos” is not an option for
consumers to consider when making a purchasing decision.
We glean from the La Perle testimony that the consuming public has been exposed
frequently and nationwide to the “Live Photos” feature as part of an iPhone or iPad
device. Cf. Bose Corp. v QSC Audio Prods., Inc., 293 F.3d 1367, 63 USPQ2d 1303,
1309 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (a product mark may be assessed independently for possible
fame where the evidence shows the product mark stands apart from the house mark).
In this case, however, we cannot separate “Live Photos” from the iPhone or iPad
marks and we are unable to assess consumer recognition of “Live Photos” as a
trademark.
Applicant’s sales and number of customers does not support finding “Live Photos”
has acquired distinctiveness.

222 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶51 (49 TTABVUE 22-23).
223 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶¶53, 54 (49 TTABVUE 23-24).
224 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶34 (49 TTABVUE 14).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 86 -

5. Intentional copying.
La Perle testified that “numerous entities in the United States and elsewhere have
tried to copy [Applicant’s] Mark by adopting trademarks containing the phrase ‘Live
Photos” for their own, unrelated products”225 and such activities are “intentional
efforts to copy [Applicant’s] Mark and trade off [Applicant’s] goodwill.”226 However,
there is no testimony or evidence that any of the third parties using the term “Live
Photos” did so to confuse consumers and pass off their products as Applicant’s. In
fact, Applicant’s argument stretches credulity when you review the third party uses.
If Applicant truly believed that the third parties were intentionally copying
Applicant’s trademark to pass off their camera apps as Applicant’s, we would expect
that Applicant would have lodged an objection to the infringing use. However, there
is no testimony or other evidence that Applicant lodged objections or sent notices to
these purported infringers to put them on notice that they were violating Applicant’s
proprietary rights. It is far more likely that the third parties are using “Live Photos”
to fairly and in good faith describe their apps.
We find there is no evidence of intentional copying.
6. Unsolicited media coverage of the product embodying the mark.
La Perle testified that Applicant’s “Live Photos” feature received substantial
unsolicited press coverage and critical acclaim.227 But the media attention focuses on

225 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶68 (49 TTABVUE 31).
226 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶69 (49 TTABVUE 31).
227 La Perle Testimony Decl. ¶¶56-61 (49 TTABVUE 24-29).
Opposition No. 91239006

- 87 -

iPhones and refers to “Live Photos” in text as a iPhone camera feature. The media
attention does not separate “Live Photos” from Applicant or its iPhone trademark.
“Live Photos” does not stand apart from Applicant or the iPhone mark. Therefore, it
fails to demonstrate independent trademarks significance. Compare Bose Corp.,
63 USPQ2d at 1308-09. It is unlikely consumers perceive or understand that “Live
Photos” identifies the source of the camera feature when a writer or reviewer refers
to Apple’s Live Photo feature.
7. Conclusion.
After considering all of the factors for which there is evidence in determining
whether Applicant’s purported mark “Live Photos” has acquired distinctiveness, we
find that Applicant has not met its burden of proving “live Photos” has acquired
distinctiveness.
Decision: We sustain the opposition to register “Live Photos” on the ground that
it is generic.
We sustain the opposition to register “Live Photos” on the ground that it is merely
descriptive.
We sustain the opposition to register “Live Photos” on the ground that it has not
acquired distinctiveness.