Maury Tepper Reflects on Winning INTA’s President’s Award and the Lifelong Bonds That Shaped His Career

Looking back, what key moments or decisions in your career do you think led to the recognition of the President’s Award?

I would have to say a lot of dumb luck! I was on the Trademark Office Practices Committee–U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Subcommittee at one point, and I thought it was a great opportunity to get to meet the other side when you file a trademark application. Things are much more transparent these days. Technology has changed a lot. But it was somewhat of a mystery back in the day. What did these examining attorneys look like and do? What do they see when we send in our applications? Just the opportunity to sit down with the managers, talk about what they’re seeing, let them know the issues that the trademark community is having and how we can improve things, has provided valuable insights that help me to this day.

The first couple of meetings were not easy. Everybody has an application that they’re upset about, right? I think it’s natural to want to go in and complain about it when given the chance. And of course, that’s one of the worst things you can do because it allows them to tune you out. We should try instead to spend some time being thoughtful and discussing among each other what we see as trends and issues that might be helpful for the USPTO to also pay some attention to.

With a whole lot of good people working hard together to avoid that natural temptation, I think that we did manage to start a dialogue. We set the right tone in those early days with the USPTO, and to this very day representatives of the USPTO are here at the [Leadership Meeting]. They always come. They keep INTA updated and involved.

So, involvement in INTA means that you can end up in these unexpected but quite influential places that you didn’t think would be possible?

People tease, but when we worked on the legislation side, some of the best work we did was keeping things out of the Lanham Act! There are an amazing number of causes and special interests, and when somebody has a problem, they call their senator. They just want to change the trademark law to their liking. So sometimes we talk about what needs to change, what we need to add. But sometimes you feel just like a goalie—you’re just trying to keep things out.

As the Act stands, it’s a brief statute. It sets out principles. We understand them. I don’t want to upset any brethren in the copyright community, but if you read the Copyright Act and put the two [acts] next to each other, it reads much more like a contract. And largely because Congress sort of handed over the setting-policy objectives and let the content industry and the community duke it out, they came up with language and compromises; it really is very dense, very lengthy, and very specific. The Lanham Act has been allowed to breathe and live.

How has your involvement with INTA shaped your perspective on trademark law and global IP issues?

Most of us would approach an issue from just our own point of view, whether it’s our clients or our company. However, INTA has so many stakeholders. Our organization allows committees to share input, and by the time we’ve discussed, evaluated, and worked on an issue, you’ve taken in every perspective.

That’s important. It’s why we are trusted, respected, and why governments around the world look to INTA for our expertise—because it’s a balanced perspective. We’re not pushing one viewpoint; we’re trying to do what’s best for the IP community.

Every time we produce a committee report, for example, the most important part may well be the dissenting section. We capture the conversation. If a committee worked on an issue and 100 percent of the people think the same way, you probably don’t have a good outcome. So, we capture our views and include all different perspectives and concerns expressed. It’s an important part of the work.

You’ve been described as someone who brings talented people together. What’s your secret to building strong teams?

I have to say dumb luck again! You just have a sense of what someone is gifted at. Most people tend to find situations that suit them, but if you’re looking for something, you need to make sure that you’ve got all the elements you need. It’s a little bit like an organic chemistry experiment.

The best thing you can ever get is someone that you respect who disagrees with you. It’s good for both people. We don’t have enough of that in the world these days. At the end of the day, we’re talking about consumers we want to protect; this is all market-based. If you only have one thought, one perspective, you’re missing at least half of the world, possibly more.

I see you have a degree in music, and I just wonder what prompted you to go down the legal route following that.

Because I’m not a good enough saxophone player to feed myself doing it! Music is one of the best hobbies a person can have. I love it too much to try and make it into a job. It’s a great outlet.

It’s also a good stress reliever. A lot of studies show that if you compare the brain waves of someone who is improvising a jazz solo with someone who meditates, they look very similar.

 What role does creativity play in your approach to IP law and how has your background informed your legal practice?

That’s a really interesting question. I think probably one of the most important places I see that is on the dispute resolution side. There is never a single, clear answer that is going to fix a concern, unless we’re dealing straight up with a counterfeiter or a situation where it is very clear who the bad guys are. We’ve got to shut them down.

Many disputes are about: How close are we? What’s the real problem? And there’s never a single thing that makes it a problem. There are a lot of things going into it. It might be the mark itself. It might be some of the circumstances around it—logos or color, where you sell, who you sell to. If you are creative enough to understand, you can identify the pain point on both sides. A lot of the time, you can fix the problem a lot more efficiently by finding ways to allow both sides to get away from what is causing the issue.

In the end, it’s likely that both sides are going to have to change something or stay away from something. I know that people say that in a good compromise, everybody goes away a little unhappy, but they’re a lot happier than living with an ongoing dispute for years and years. That doesn’t help you, that doesn’t help you sell more product, and it doesn’t help your business go forward. So if you can just—and it’s a funny thing for a lawyer to say—try to listen first and try to understand how the other side sees this, you can usually work it out together.

If you could give one piece of advice to IP professionals at the start of their careers, what would it be?

There are a couple of things. First, I would say, get involved. Being young doesn’t mean you don’t have anything valuable to contribute. Take all opportunities to work with people. I know I said it earlier, but it’s the very best way to meet someone: let them see who you are, what you do, get to know people, and stick with it. INTA has been blessed. We’ve grown so much over the years that I recognize you’re not going to come to one meeting and walk away knowing the whole world. But over time, if you remain active, it will come back to you.

The other is what your mom taught you when you were in kindergarten: be nice to everybody. We will all face changes in our careers. What you’re doing today may or may not be what you do tomorrow, and having friends who are constant is a really important thing.

How do you think IP or the profession will change over the next five or 10 years? Where do you see the future direction heading?

What will remain constant is that there will be a lot of change, and we’ll worry about it. For example, at present, you have to discuss and worry about AI these days at every meeting, but what doesn’t change at the core of what we do is the human element. So, there are certainly challenges with mastering rapid changes in technology, rapid changes in the way it brings things to market, and how people encounter and live with brands. What doesn’t change is the human element, and we will always need people who understand that.

And if you are currently worried about your job being replaced by an algorithm, that might not be the right job to stay in. I do think that there’s always going to be a need for people who have good judgment and a good understanding of people, and it’s more important than ever that we relate to each other. So, I don’t think that’s going to go away.

What are your favorite brands?

SELMER, because it’s the saxophone that I play and it’s made by a classic French company. If you’re dedicated enough to climb the hill above Paris, you can go and visit the shop.

Is there anything you feel like we haven’t asked, or just generally around the award or INTA?

Everyone should know what an extraordinary opportunity you have when you participate in INTA. It’s about being a part of something. And you’ll get out of it what you put in, but definitely jump in. Don’t hesitate on that!

Although every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of this article, readers are urged to check independently on matters of specific concern or interest. The opinions expressed in this interview are those of the persons being interviewed and do not purport to reflect the views of INTA or its members. 

© 2025 International Trademark Association