Business
First Amendment May Help Cannabis Companies Beat Trademark Infringement Claims
The U.S. Constitution’s free speech protections, found in the First Amendment, may present a legal recourse for cannabis brands in trouble for using marks that are similar to famous trademarks.
To be clear, a free speech argument will not be of help to those who simply copy a famous trademark, making no effort to differentiate between their mark and the famous one.
In the case of trademarks that simply evoke famous ones, however, the First Amendment could help preclude infringement claims.
Famous trademarks are a not-uncommon source of inspiration for brand creators. At times, brands take that inspiration too far, effectively appropriating a famous trademark.
For example, candymaker Ferrara Candy Co. sued a company called Akimov LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in May, alleging that it was selling THC-containing products bearing some of Ferrara’s registered trademarks, including those for its Nerds and Trolli candies.
Assuming the allegations are true, Akimov was not using marks inspired by Ferrara’s, but rather using Ferrara trademarks without authorization.
The harm presented to Ferrara and the public by the presence in the market of Nerds and Trolli products not made by Ferrara should be self-evident. Consumers could be misled into buying Nerds and Trolli products of unclear provenance, possibly of lower quality than the genuine products made by Ferrara.
That is without even taking into account the risks posed by the alleged presence of cannabis in Akimov’s products. For Ferrara, its reputation could suffer in case of any problems with Akimov’s products, as the problems could be associated with Ferrara’s trademarks, even if they were not in fact produced by Ferrara.
Moreover, sales of unauthorized Nerds and Trolli products to misled consumers, who in fact wanted the genuine article, would represent a loss of revenue to Ferrara.
In other cases, the inspiration drawn from a famous trademark might be obvious, but the potential for harm minimal or inexistent. For instance, last year Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. sued a company, Terphogz LLC, that sells Zkittlez products in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging infringement of Wrigley’s Skittles trademarks.
It is hard to argue that the Zkittlez name is not a play on Skittles, but whether the use of Zkittlez trademarks infringes on Wrigley’s Skittles marks is another matter.
In fact, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office allowed the registration of two marks incorporating the word “Zkittlez,” not finding a likelihood of confusion between these marks and the Skittles ones.
In cases where their mark is not identical to the famous trademark, brand creators can argue that there is no likelihood of confusion. At the same time, the Constitution and its free speech protections might constitute another arrow in the quiver of brands that seek inspiration from famous trademarks, and find themselves as defendants in a trademark action.
In relevant part, the First Amendment to the Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” There is tension between the First Amendment’s mandate against abridgments of freedom of speech, on the one hand, and federal trademark rights provided for under laws made by Congress, on the other.
In particular, the Lanham Act prohibits the registration of a trademark that so closely resembles a registered mark or a mark that was previously used by another “as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the application, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.”
Strictly speaking, brand owners’ freedom of speech is limited by this prohibition, as it means they cannot use certain words, phrases and logos in connection with their products.
Recognizing this tension between trademark rights and freedom of speech, courts look to strike a balance. In Iancu v. Brunetti, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2019 held that a provision of the Lanham Act prohibiting the registration of immoral or scandalous trademarks infringed on the First Amendment.
Previously, in Matal v. Tam, the Supreme Court in 2017 reached a similar conclusion regarding a prohibition on disparaging trademarks.
By contrast, courts have generally considered that the curtailment of First Amendment protections is acceptable when denying protection to a trademark that is likely to be confused with one previously used in commerce.
In its 1987 San Francisco Arts & Athletics Inc. v. U.S. Olympic Committee decision, the Supreme Court recognized that the suppression of certain words in the interest of trademark protection can have the unfortunate effect of also suppressing the expression of ideas.
At the same time, the court considered that this risk had to be weighed against the importance of protecting the value added to words through the efforts of parties who use these words as trademarks.
This calculus changes where artistic expression is implicated. In Rogers v. Grimaldi, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1989 adopted a test under which, if free speech interests are implicated, a plaintiff claiming trademark infringement will only prevail under two circumstances. One is where the infringing trademark has “no artistic relevance” as used. The other is where the infringing trademark is explicitly misleading as to source or content.
It may seem like a stretch to view punny names like Zkittlez as artistic expressions. Yet in 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had no problem determining that a dog toy was an artistic expression in VIP Products LLC v. Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. The “Bad Spaniels Silly Squeaker” toy resembled a bottle of Jack Daniel’s whiskey, and bears the phrase “the Old No. 2, on your Tennessee Carpet” instead of “Old No. 7 Brand Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey,” as on actual bottles.
In its reasoning, the Ninth Circuit made clear that an expressive work need not be the sort of work to be exhibited in a gallery. Rather, the key is whether the use of the famous mark serves to express a point of view or communicate an idea. In the Ninth Circuit’s view, the use of elements associated with Jack Daniel’s brand image on a dog toy conveyed a humorous message entitled to free speech protections.
The Ninth Circuit’s reasoning above could be applied to some of the trademarks used by some cannabis brands that parody, or are inspired by, more famous trademarks. While not everyone will find trademarks such as Zkittlez to be amusing, it is reasonable to speculate that at least some people will be amused.
To be sure, not all cannabis trademarks being challenged by the owners of famous trademarks will cross the threshold of artistic expression, but arguably some do. This in turn means that, under the Rogers test, the use of these cannabis trademarks will only constitute infringement of more established brands under very limited circumstances.
Applying the Rogers test to the Zkittlez marks, its use has artistic relevance — there is no joke otherwise. Meanwhile, it is hard to argue that these explicitly mislead as to the source or content of the work.
The letter substitutions that differentiate the Zkittlez trademarks from the Skittles ones are significant. As such, they send an immediate signal to consumers, to the effect that these trademarks are not identifying the Skittles candies well known to the public. If anything, it can be argued that the Zkittlez trademarks seek to lead consumers away from confusion.
Contrast this to the facts in a lawsuit filed earlier this year in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by Hermes against Mason Rothschild, the creator of a nonfungible token collection named MetaBirkins.
Hermes has registered the BIRKIN trademark in connection with handbags. As Hermes alleges in the lawsuit, with many established brands entering the metaverse, consumers would expect that NFTs bearing famous trademarks would in fact be affiliated with the owners of said trademarks.
On the other hand, it would be far harder to make that argument if the chosen name for the collection was MetaVirkins, for example.
While decisions such as the one in Bad Spaniels provide legal inspiration for some cannabis brands in infringement hot water, it is critical to keep in mind that cannabis products are not chew toys. Courts might view free speech issues differently in cases where the allegedly infringed trademarks are used on products that are unlawful at the federal level, such as marijuana, as defined in the Controlled Substances Act, or CBD products whose introduction into interstate commerce violates the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
Owners of famous trademarks could argue that parodical or other similar marks should not enjoy trademark protection if they are used on unlawful products. The logical counterargument would be that the word, phrase or logo at hand is a First Amendment-protected expression first, and a trademark second.
For our purposes, however, it suffices to highlight this potential opening for a court looking for a legal distinction upon which to base a decision favorable to the famous trademark’s owner.
It is also worth noting that VIP Products applies only to the Ninth Circuit; other circuits may take different approaches.
Finally, it is worth stressing that the First Amendment will not come to the rescue of those cannabis brands that cannot register their trademarks at the USPTO because they are used in connection with products that are unlawful. For a brand facing a trademark infringement or dilution action, though, the Constitution might offer deliverance.
Airports across India witnessed scenes of distress and confusion as thousands of passengers were stranded due to IndiGo’s massive flight disruptions. Families with medical emergencies, funerals, and personal crises were left helpless as the airline cancelled hundreds of flights without adequate communication or support.
Passengers described desperate situations — a mother pleading for sanitary pads for her daughter, a woman unable to transport her husband’s coffin, and others stranded while trying to reach family funerals or hospitals. “It was like a lockdown at the airport,” one passenger said, describing the panic that unfolded as IndiGo’s mismanagement crippled operations nationwide.
Root Cause: IndiGo’s Market Monopoly
The turmoil, industry experts argue, stems from IndiGo’s monopolistic control over India’s domestic aviation market. The airline operates nearly 2,100 flights daily and holds around 60% market share — meaning every second plane flying within India belongs to IndiGo.
This dominance has given the company unparalleled influence. When IndiGo falters, the entire aviation system suffers. Passengers are left with few alternatives, as other airlines lack capacity to absorb stranded travellers. The result: skyrocketing ticket prices, chaos at terminals, and total dependence on a single private operator.
Aviation pioneer Captain G.R. Gopinath, founder of Air Deccan, criticised the government’s inaction, noting that on some routes, IndiGo’s economy fares surged to ₹1 lakh. He compared the situation to a hostage crisis, writing that the airline “held the system ransom” and forced regulators to defer new safety rules meant to protect pilots and passengers.
Government Intervention and Regulatory Weakness
The crisis erupted after IndiGo failed to comply with the Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) — rules introduced by the DGCA in January 2024 requiring adequate rest for pilots. Despite having nearly two years to adapt, IndiGo blamed the rule for operational disruptions, citing a shortage of pilots.
Under mounting public pressure, the government stepped in, temporarily relaxing FDTL norms and capping airfare hikes. Officials claimed the move was to protect passengers, but analysts say it exposed the state’s vulnerability to corporate monopolies. “The government had no option but to yield,” said one aviation policy expert, pointing out that ignoring safety regulations for short-term relief could have long-term consequences.
The crisis also rekindled memories of the June 2025 Air India crash near London, which claimed over 240 lives. Experts warn that compromising pilot rest and safety standards to maintain flight schedules could risk another tragedy.
If Telecom Giants Fail: A National Paralysis
The article raises a troubling question — what if a similar crisis struck the telecom sector, where Jio and Airtel together control nearly 80% of subscribers and serve over 780 million users?
If both networks failed simultaneously, the repercussions would be catastrophic. Internet shutdowns would halt UPI transactions, online banking, OTP verifications, video calls, OTT streaming, and emergency communications. Critical services such as airports, hospitals, stock exchanges, and small businesses — many of which rely on WhatsApp and digital payments — would come to a standstill.
In essence, a telecom breakdown could paralyse India’s digital economy, exposing the nation’s dependence on a duopoly.
E-commerce Monopoly: Another Fragile Ecosystem
The same risk looms over the e-commerce sector, where Amazon and Flipkart dominate nearly 80% of the market. A disruption similar to IndiGo’s could cripple daily life — halting delivery of groceries, medicines, and essential goods, freezing refunds and customer support, and leaving small sellers without platforms to trade.
Local retailers, freed from competition, might exploit shortages by inflating prices. Such a scenario underscores the perils of market centralisation in sectors critical to everyday living.
A Wake-Up Call for Regulators
The IndiGo crisis, analysts say, is a warning shot for policymakers and regulators. A single company’s operational failure exposed systemic weaknesses in India’s infrastructure and consumer protection mechanisms.
As the aviation regulator DGCA investigates and IndiGo works to restore normalcy, the broader lesson remains clear: unchecked monopoly power in any essential service — whether air travel, telecom, or e-commerce — poses a direct threat to economic stability and citizen welfare.
Without stronger competition laws, redundancy frameworks, and regulatory oversight, India risks repeating this crisis across multiple sectors — each time with millions of citizens paying the price.
Agriculture & Life Sciences
Canada’s Cannabis Industry Urges Government to Support Growing Export Market
BuzzBuzz Cannabis Business News — 24 November 2025
Canada’s cannabis sector is calling on federal and provincial governments to recognize its fast-growing export potential and extend the same support other regulated industries receive. Industry leaders warn that Canada is losing its early global advantage due to slow regulatory processes, lack of trade promotion, and limited access to government-backed financing.
Canada’s medical-cannabis exporters now generate more than half a billion dollars annually and ship products to major markets including Germany, the UK, Australia, and Poland. Despite this, cannabis remains largely absent from Canada’s official trade and export strategies.
Industry Calls for Streamlined Export System
Paul McCarthy, President of the Cannabis Council of Canada, says the country has everything required to dominate the global medical cannabis trade—except government alignment.
“Our requests are simple,” McCarthy said. “Expedite Health Canada’s export-permit process, integrate cannabis into federal export programs like Global Affairs Canada trade missions and CanExport, and ensure provinces include cannabis in their export strategies.”
He stressed the need for mutual recognition agreements with importing countries to eliminate redundant testing and documentation. Access to Export Development Canada (EDC) and Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) services also remains off-limits to cannabis exporters, placing them at a steep disadvantage.
“This industry does not just need permission to operate,” McCarthy added. “It needs to be treated like every other legitimate contributor to Canada’s trade objectives.”
Competitors Are Moving Faster
McCarthy warns that while Canada pioneered medical cannabis standards, other countries are rapidly advancing with more flexible and export-friendly systems.
“Faster approvals, lower compliance costs, and active government-backed strategies are helping other nations catch up,” he said. “Canada’s regulatory friction is already costing us global market share.”
Export permits currently must be issued for each shipment—a process that can take weeks—and Canadian testing standards often differ from international requirements, forcing companies to repeat expensive compliance checks.
High Tide CEO: Canada Needs a National Export Strategy
Raj Grover, CEO of High Tide Inc., says Canada risks surrendering its leadership if policymakers remain inactive.
“Canada developed the world’s most advanced cannabis regulatory system and contributed $76.5 billion to GDP since legalization,” Grover said. “But without a National Cannabis Export Strategy, we will lose ground to Australia, Israel, Portugal, and other emerging competitors.”
He noted that Canada’s industry table created by Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) has not met in more than a year—an opportunity wasted.
Grover urged the federal government to introduce domestic GMP certification and potency standards to streamline international market access. “Canadian producers must currently get GMP approval country by country. It’s duplicative and costly. Canada should be setting global benchmarks, not chasing them.”
Germany: A Key Market for Canadian Firms
High Tide recently expanded into Europe with its majority acquisition of Germany’s Remexian Pharma GmbH, giving the company a direct import and distribution channel in Europe’s largest medical-cannabis market.
“Our German strategy is already structured for success,” Grover said. “Through Remexian, we can supply premium medical cannabis at the lowest possible price, helping meet Germany’s quality and cost demands.”
Grover also warned that U.S. companies are already purchasing Canadian firms to stage their own international expansion—another sign that Canada’s leadership position is slipping.
Government Response Remains Limited
In response to industry concerns, a Global Affairs Canada spokesperson said the Trade Commissioner Service “continues to support exporters of cannabis for medical and scientific purposes that have obtained Health Canada permits.”
However, industry leaders argue that this support is minimal and does not include key tools such as trade missions, export credits, or bilateral agreements that other sectors routinely receive.
A Closing Window of Opportunity
With medical-cannabis exports already exceeding $500 million annually, industry executives say Canada must act quickly to preserve its competitive edge.
As McCarthy warns, without coordinated government support, Canada risks losing high-value pharmaceutical manufacturing, research investments, and thousands of skilled jobs.
And as Grover’s expansion into Germany demonstrates, the industry is moving forward—but whether Canada moves with it may determine if the country remains a global leader or becomes a pioneer that let others capitalize on its breakthroughs.
Business
A Tipping Point for Cannabis: President Trump Champions CBD & Cannabis Science on Truth Social
When the President of the United States shares a video about the life changing potential of hemp derived CBD on his personal social media platform, it is more than news, it is a cultural shift.
For decades our government lied to us about cannabis. It demonized the plant, waged war on its users, and filled prisons while allowing pharmaceutical companies to flood the nation with addictive and deadly drugs. For over a century we have been fighting uphill, not just for legalization, but for truth, for science, and for the right to heal ourselves naturally.
Now in 2025, the most powerful political figure on Earth is using his own voice and platform to talk about the endocannabinoid system and the science backed benefits of CBD. That is monumental. It is validation for everyone who has fought, been arrested, been silenced, and been dismissed for telling this truth. The President’s video post is already being described as a pivotal moment in cannabis history, and President Trump CBD Cannabis Science Truth Social is trending across platforms as advocates celebrate the breakthrough.
The Science Behind the Endocannabinoid System
The video begins by introducing something most people, including many doctors, still know little about, the endocannabinoid system. Discovered in the 1990s, the ECS is a network of receptors and signaling molecules that works as the body’s master regulator, coordinating communication between major systems like the nervous, immune, cardiovascular, and digestive systems.
The roots of this discovery go back much further. CBD was first isolated in 1940 by American chemist Roger Adams, but it was Dr. Raphael Mechoulam, an Israeli organic chemist, who fully elucidated the chemical structure of CBD and identified its stereochemistry in the 1960s. His pioneering work not only opened the door to modern cannabinoid science but also earned him the title “Godfather of Cannabis Research.” It was this foundation that led to the identification of the endocannabinoid system itself decades later, revealing how cannabinoids interact with our physiology on a fundamental level.
The ECS is now widely recognized as a vital part of human biology, with extensive research supported by the National Institutes of Health. When functioning properly, the ECS acts like the conductor of an orchestra, ensuring every section plays in harmony. As we age, the system weakens. That imbalance is linked to inflammation, chronic pain, cognitive decline, sleep problems, and many other conditions associated with aging.
Mainstream medicine often addresses these issues with pharmaceutical band aids, dangerous and addictive drugs that treat symptoms rather than root causes. Lifestyle changes such as diet and exercise help, but they only partially support the ECS and do so slowly over time.
Hemp Derived CBD: A Game Changer for Aging
Here is where the science gets exciting. As the video explains, the ECS can be restored much more quickly with hemp derived CBD. Strengthening this system naturally helps the body regain balance, reducing pain, improving sleep, lowering stress, slowing disease progression, and even extending healthy lifespan.
It is not theoretical. One in five seniors is already using CBD to manage pain, arthritis, cancer symptoms, sleep disorders, Alzheimer’s, and more. Despite decades of research and acknowledgment from institutions like the National Institutes of Health, most physicians receive no training on the ECS. There are still no FDA standards for CBD products on the market. If that were the case for any other class of medicine, it would be considered malpractice.
The World Health Organization has confirmed CBD’s excellent safety profile and non addictive nature in its critical review report. The result is that millions of older Americans are suffering unnecessarily when a safe and natural solution exists.
Hemp derived CBD is a powerful first step in restoring balance to the endocannabinoid system, but it is only part of the picture. Research shows that full spectrum cannabis extracts, which include a broader range of cannabinoids and terpenes, can work even more effectively. Complete concentrated cannabis oil, containing the full spectrum of natural endocannabinoids, may deliver the most profound results for certain patients. Expanding access to these therapies will be essential if we want to unlock the full healing potential of this plant.
The Economic and Social Impact
The video cites a powerful figure. A PricewaterhouseCoopers analysis estimates that fully integrating cannabis into the healthcare system could save the United States nearly 64 billion dollars annually. These savings reflect reduced pharmaceutical dependency, fewer hospitalizations, improved chronic disease outcomes, and enhanced quality of life for aging Americans. You can read more about PwC’s research on healthcare innovation here.
It is a financial argument, but it is also a moral one. Why should our elders endure pain, anxiety, and cognitive decline when nature has given us tools to help them live longer, happier, and healthier lives?
A Call to Action: Finish What the Farm Bill Started
The message concludes by crediting the 2018 Farm Bill, championed by President Trump, for legalizing hemp and laying the groundwork for today’s CBD market. The Farm Bill was just the first step.
Now the call is for bold next moves.
- Educate doctors about the endocannabinoid system
- Include CBD under Medicare coverage
- Provide clear federal standards for CBD quality and dosing
These steps would constitute the most significant senior health reform in modern history, one that would transform aging and cement a powerful legacy for any administration that makes it happen.
What This Means for Future Cannabis Medicine
For those of us who have been in the cannabis community for decades, this is not just another news story. It is a signal that our movement is winning. A conversation that was once criminalized and censored is now being amplified by the President of the United States on his own platform.
It means the science is undeniable. It means the truth can no longer be buried. It means the wall of prohibition is cracking, not just legally, but culturally, scientifically, and politically.
It also means that everything we have been fighting for at 420 Magazine since 1993, education, access, healing, and justice, is finally moving full steam ahead. The President Trump CBD Cannabis Science Truth Social moment is proof that science and policy are finally converging.
-
Business2 years agoPot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms
-
Business2 years agoNew Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud
-
Business2 years agoAlabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses
-
Business2 years agoWashington State Pays Out $9.4 Million in Refunds Relating to Drug Convictions
-
Business2 years agoMarijuana companies suing US attorney general in federal prohibition challenge
-
Business2 years agoLegal Marijuana Handed A Nothing Burger From NY State
-
Business2 years agoCan Cannabis Help Seasonal Depression
-
Blogs3 years agoCannabis Art Is Flourishing On Etsy