Co. v. The Knife Co. Here, the plaintiff in the underlying suit contended that The Knife Company, the insured in this action, infringed its word trademark on hunting and sporting knives. Where trademark infringement is specifically excluded from the defendant's CGL policy. Where the policy specifically excludes trademark infringement in its advertising injury coverage, it will be more difficult to plead to trigger the coverage of that policy. English dictionaries generally define 'slogan' as any word or combination of words that acts as an attention-getting device. . . .
Dictionaries generally define 'title' as a name or appellation. . . .
I find that the Touch of Class concern that holds the trademark for the phrase at issue used that term as an attention-getting device. This is evidence that, by paying close attention to the coverage language, and mimicking that language, there may be a way to avoid even the most specific exclusions of trademark infringement in the defendant's insurance. The following is a situation in which no coverage was found. The defendant's CGL policy in Parameter Driven Software, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Ins. Unlike the court in A Touch of Class, the court in Parameter did not find coverage.