You know what “PHONECASTING” is don’t you? I have to admit that I didn’t have a clue what “PHONECASTING” was until I listened to the oral argument of In re Sharp. Never having heard of the term before, I was surprised that it had been determined to be a generic term by the TTAB. The Federal Circuit affirmed that decision.
The oral argument discusses whether PHONECASTING is generic or merely descriptive. It is interesting in that it discusses the fact that the TTAB relied upon WIKIPEDIA entries and the applicant’s own PCT patent application that defined PHONECASTING, among other evidence.
You can listen to the oral argument here: [Listen]. The discussion of the Wikipedia articles takes place at about the 17:30 and 24:30 minute marks in the oral argument.
The TTAB opinions are available [here] and [here].
The Federal Circuit Rule 36 affirmance is available here: [Read].