Luft Tumlin PLLC

10/13/2026

From the Luft Tumlin Trademark (and Contracts!) Desk:

A client recently sent its usual services agreement to a new customer. The customer sent it back: "too one-sided, make it more balanced before we send it to our lawyers."

A form written to protect you will look one-sided to the other side. That’s its job. When a customer pushes back, a few things help: (1) Ask what they object to. A general complaint asks you to negotiate against yourself. (2) Know which terms you won’t give up, and why. (3) Give where it costs you little, like a mutual damages waiver or a claims deadline that applies to both sides. (4) Compare any rewrite to the original, provision by provision. Protections drop out quietly.

Read more on our blog here: https://luft-tumlin.com/from-the-luft-tumlin-trademark-and-contracts-desk-when-a-customer-says-your-contract-is-too-one-sided/

10/05/2026

From the Luft Tumlin Trademark Desk: Form the LLC first, then file the trademark

A client called ready to file a trademark application. The LLC wasn't formed yet, so the plan was to file in the client's own name now and sort out the company later. I suggested they wait a few days and do it in the other order. The application should be filed by the owner of the mark, and the owner is whoever is actually going to sell the goods or services under it. If that's going to be the LLC, the LLC should be the applicant.

Filing in your own name isn't automatically wrong. If you own and control the company, the USPTO will generally treat the company's use as your use. But you've created cleanup. You personally own a brand your company uses, so you need a license from you to the company. Eventually you want the mark in the company, so you need an assignment and a recording with the USPTO. And if you filed on an intent-to-use basis, you can't assign the application to the company before you've filed proof of use unless the company is taking over an existing, ongoing business, which it isn't if you haven't launched.

Read the full post here: https://nctrademarklawyers.com/nc-trademark-lawyers/f/from-the-luft-tumlin-trademark-desk-form-the-llc-first

09/28/2026

A client forwarded me one of these last week: an email from a "registrar" in Asia saying someone has applied to register your company name as a trademark or domain in China, asking if you authorized it. Don't respond. It's a sales pitch designed to make you panic and pay to "protect" your name. If you actually do business or manufacture in China, a filing strategy there is worth discussing, but that conversation should start with your lawyer, not a cold email.

I've started keeping short notes on what comes across my desk as a trademark attorney. This week's also covers official-looking USPTO "notices" that aren't from the USPTO, and the five-year deadline that quietly cancels registrations.

https://nctrademarklawyers.com/nc-trademark-lawyers/f/notes-from-the-luft-tumlin-trademark-desk

On names I talked a client out of. I spent part of the day on Friday telling a client that the name they loved wouldn't work. Nobody else was using the exact name. The problem was that three companies in adjacent fields ...

09/14/2026

Delaware just significantly expanded its privacy law. Delaware's Personal Data Privacy Act (DPDPA) previously only applied to businesses processing the personal data of at least 35,000 Delaware residents (or 10,000 residents if the business derived more than 20% of its gross revenue from selling personal data).

On September 2, 2026, Governor Meyer signed HB 380, amending the DPDPA effective January 1, 2027. Among the primary changes is the applicability threshold, which drops from 35,000 Delaware consumers to just 10,000 (5,000 for businesses that sell personal data as a meaningful revenue source). The amendment broadens what counts as "sensitive data," which triggers heightened consent and handling obligations. New categories include national origin, health treatment or status information, neural data, financial account information and credentials, and government-issued identification numbers. Consent is now required before processing sensitive data, not just disclosure.

A companion bill, HB 381, already in effect, requires notifying the Delaware Attorney General within 60 days of determining that Delaware residents were affected by a data breach.

In practice, if your business collects or processes Delaware residents' data, you should check whether you cross the new thresholds, confirm your privacy notice and consent flows account for the expanded sensitive-data categories, and revisit your data-sharing and vendor contracts.

The new law is effective January 1, 2027.

09/10/2026

I post about this occasionally, but thought it was worth posting about again, since it is so common. This is from the USPTO website:

Scammers may contact you immediately after you apply
As soon as you file, your information is public. Scammers often pose as attorneys or USPTO staff.

The USPTO will never:
• Contact you to schedule a “review” meeting
• Mail you a trademark invoice or bill
• Ask for your USPTO.gov account password
• Request payment information by phone, email, or text
• Pressure you or use scare tactics to get you to act immediately

Don’t lose your money or your personal information. Learn more about recognizing common scams.

Home page of the United States Patent and Trademark Office's main web site.

07/23/2026

Some fun (and truth) with AI.

03/27/2026

Matthew McConaughey is seeking a registered trademark for his voice and the phrase “Alright, alright, alright” as a legal strategy to get ahead of AI voice-cloning by using existing federal tools.

“Right of publicity” protection is currently a patchwork of state laws, with different rules, different scopes, and substantial uncertainty around digital replicas and AI-generated outputs. Some states have updated statutes that address deepfakes; others have little or no specific guidance on AI at all.

By framing his voice and catchphrases as trademarks, McConaughey is using federal law to create nationwide protection based on consumer confusion and false endorsement. If an AI clone uses those protected sound marks or phrases in a commercial context that looks like advertising or branded content, he can argue it is misuse of a source identifier, not just unauthorized imitation.

For brands that rely on distinctive voices, signature lines, or recognizable performances—such as podcasts, courses, or recurring ad campaigns—a single tool like copyright is unlikely to address all risks. A more robust approach treats these elements as part of a layered strategy, combining publicity rights, contracts, and, where appropriate, trademark protection for the components that function as identifiers of source in the marketplace.

For a deeper explanation of McConaughey’s approach and its implications for AI, see: https://zurl.co/QovHw.

As artificial intelligence continues to blur the line between authentic and synthetic identity, proactive legal protection has never been more important.

02/14/2026

Don't make assumptions (about privacy, privilege, or otherwise) when using AI. This past week, a ruling from the Southern District of New York held that a defendant's generative AI prompts and outputs about his legal exposure were not protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. It's important for client to understand that work product protection requires attorney direction — doing it on your own with AI and sharing it with counsel later doesn't count. https://zurl.co/WaOq5

On February 10, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff of the Southern District of New York issued a bench ruling holding that a defendant’s use of...

02/04/2026

We wanted to write to remind our clients and friends with business entities of upcoming requirements.

North Carolina Limited Liability Companies

Limited liability companies must file Annual Reports on or before your company's tax deadline. In most cases, your accountant or CPA is already handling this for you. If not, your Annual Report can be filed with the North Carolina Secretary of State using its online filing system.

Although LLC's, unlike corporations, do not have to hold annual meetings or maintain meeting minutes (unless required by your operating agreement), sometimes it is a good idea to keep a book of meeting minutes/consents to ensure that you are following proper formalities. Failure to follow proper formalities can open you up to potential personal liability for the debts and liabilities of the company.

NOTE: This requirement is similar in most states and does not just apply to North Carolina entities.

North Carolina Corporations

Corporations are required by the North Carolina General Statutes to hold an annual meeting of the shareholders of the corporation. Typically, unless prohibited by your bylaws, a corporation can hold such a “meeting” by written consent in accordance with N.C.G.S. § 55-7-04, a copy of which should be added to your corporate books. The directors may also be required to hold an annual meeting, which can also be held by written consent. Shareholders/owners of companies who do not hold annual meetings or properly keep a corporate book of minutes or written consent actions open themselves up to potential personal liability for the debts and liabilities of the company.

Although your meeting minutes do not have to be filed with the Secretary of State, Annual Reports must be filed on or before your company's tax deadline. In most cases, your accountant or CPA is already handling this for you. If not, your Annual Report can be filed with the North Carolina Secretary of State using its online filing system.

NOTE: This requirement is similar in most states and does not just apply to North Carolina entities.

If you have any questions or need input on your meeting minutes or annual report filings, please feel free to reach out to us.

01/26/2026

I've been giving talks about AI and the law for a couple of years now. One of the issues I've tried to address is a hodgepodge of laws and regulations -- or the lack thereof -- that pertain to AI. This can be a problem for businesses trying to navigate their obligations when launching new AI-related products or services or when using AI for internal purposes.

Executive Order 14365, signed December 11, 2025, is the administration’s first serious push toward addressing that patchwork. Among other things, it:

(1) Directs the DOJ to form an AI Litigation Task Force aimed at challenging certain state AI laws

(2) Pushes federal agencies toward greater national alignment (including through funding and regulatory coordination mechanisms)

(3) Signals support for Congress to pursue a single federal standard

Executive orders don’t automatically override state law. Colorado’s AI Act, California’s evolving disclosure/transparency rules, and other state-level requirements are still in effect today. Expect litigation—and serious pushback from state AGs—before anything changes.

For now, businesses should keep documenting how they are using AI tools—especially in hiring, lending/credit, insurance, healthcare, customer eligibility decisions, or other high-stakes workflows. That work helps with current state compliance and positions companies well if a federal standard eventually emerges.

And if you’re in healthcare, financial services, or another heavily regulated industry, don’t assume federal “one rule” efforts eliminate your obligations—sector-specific rules and enforcement risk will likely remain.