Trade Marks and Free Expression: Beyond Internal and External Balancing Robert Burrell Professor of Law, University of Sheffield & University of Western.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reputation. Reputation Reputation means that an association has been established between the mark and the source Reputation means that an association.
Advertisements

Confusion & Damage. Confusion & Damages Confusion as an element Confusion as an element Assessing confusion Assessing confusion Damage as an element Damage.
EVEN THOUGH THE CHARTER IS THE HIGHEST LAW, CAN IT STILL BE CHALLENGED AND CHANGED?
Principles of Micro Chapter 11: Public Goods and Common Resources by Tanya Molodtsova, Fall 2005.
Avoiding legal pitfalls. What is copyright? Copyright is a property right, similar to owning a car. –It gives individuals control over the use of their.
Trademark Dilution Intro to IP - Prof Merges
Exceptions to free speech. Free speech as an exercise of liberty: when are we justified in restricting it? According to Mill’s Harm Principle? “The only.
Lecture to Carleton University, Center for European Studies, December 1, 2010.
FUNDAMENTALS OF TRADEMARK LAW THE HONORABLE BERNICE B. DONALD U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN SEPT. 18, 2013 LAHORE, PAKISTAN.
Information Systems Controls for System Reliability -Information Security-
PROTECTION OF RIGHTS.
7.1 Chapter 7 Trademarks © 2003 by West Legal Studies in Business/A Division of Thomson Learning.
Overview of the EU Food Safety Requirements
Trademarks IV Domain Names & Trademarks Class Notes: April 9, 2003 Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
Trademark Law Institute Amsterdam October 15 and 16, 2010 Concepts of marks with a reputation Jan Rosén Professor of Private Law Stockholm University.
IT Applications Theory Slideshows By Mark Kelly Vceit.com Privacy Laws.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 Class 5 September 11, 2006 Idea/Expression Dichotomy Functionality Professor Fischer.
Chapter 3. What is Organizational Responsibility? Organizational responsibility refers to the responsibilities an organization has in order to have an.
Trademarks IV Infringement of Trademarks 2 Class 22 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.
Intellectual Property Basics: What Rules Apply to Faculty, Staff, and Student Work Product? Dave Broome Vice Chancellor and General Counsel October 15,
Intro to IP Class of November Trademark Dilution, Cybersquatting, False Advertising.
1 Trademark Infringement and Dilution Steve Baron March 6, 2003.
Evaluation of restrictions: art. 15 and art TAIEX Seminar on the EU Service Directive, 3 May 2007 Carlos Almaraz.
VICTORIAN CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Copyright © 2010 South-Western Legal Studies in Business, a part of South-Western Cengage Learning. and the Legal Environment, 10 th edition by Richard.
U3O2: PART A LEGAL STUDIES. ROLE OF THE CONSTITUTION  The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution act 1900, which came in to force on 1 January 1901;
Patent Settlements, Risk, and Competition Mark R. Patterson Fordham University School of Law Patent Settlements: The Issues Beyond the “Reverse Payment”
1 How To Find and Read the Law and Live to Tell (and Talk) About It Steve Baron January 29, 2009.
Mini Law Lesson How Brands Can Use #Hashtags Without Getting Sued Brian Heidelberger
Gail Davidson. Approved unanimously by the UN General Assembly on December 10,  Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
Defamation, Strict Liability and Vicarious Liability.
Ip4inno 1 A.Copyright B. ‘Reputation’ and common law trade marks C. Unregistered designs D. Semiconductor topography right.
Dialogue on Competition Policy and Intellectual Property *
Freedom of speech Media freedom and responsibility
Federation and the Constitution – The Division of Powers
Trademarks III Infringement of Trademarks
Public Goods and Common Resource
Anselm Schneider NCCR Trade Regulation/ University of Zurich
Developments in international jurisprudence
Anti-abuse in a changing world: what policy line for the EU?
Healthcare Marketing & Ethics
Public Goods and Common Resource
EVOLUTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION
Constitution and Bill of Rights
The Australian Constitution
Criticisms and Defences of Adverstising
IT Applications Theory Slideshows
Competition and IP Policy
Who was Charles Schenck?
CHAPTER 22 E-COMMERCE 2011 Thomson Reuters Legal & Regulatory Ltd. All Rights Reserved. PowerPoint slides to accompany A Guide to Business Law, 19th.
Public Goods and Common Resource
Individual Rights and the Common Good Outcome 13
PROTECTING YOUR BRAND ONLINE
Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases
Christoph Spennemann, Legal Expert
Public Goods and Common Resource
8th Trademark Law Institute Symposium
Trade Mark Protection Trade mark.
Professor Thomas Riis Centre for Information and Innovation Law
IP and legal issues Super-project.eu.
How An Organization Influences Ethical Decision-Making
Gabriele Marzano, Regional Administration of Emilia-Romagna
Public Goods and Common Resource
Public Goods and Common Resource
The European Union’s law on Common Commercial Policy
Chapter 3: Trademarks in E-Commerce.
Privacy, Data Protection and Lex Informatica -- lecture 5
Public Goods and Common Resource
European Union Law Daniele Gallo
Public Goods and Common Resource
Presentation transcript:

Trade Marks and Free Expression: Beyond Internal and External Balancing Robert Burrell Professor of Law, University of Sheffield & University of Western Australia

Designing new defences Clearly an important part of bringing trade mark law back within appropriate limits Particularly important when our policy aims require us to tolerate some degree of confusion (e.g. concurrent use defences) Defences can help reinforce the aims of trade mark law But they can also (i) be a fig leaf and (ii) create protected zones that extend beyond what is desirable (i.e. clear defences also create error costs) There may be particular problems with speech defences (Burrell & Gangjee 2010)

Which form of balancing: A false dichotomy? Defendants cannot be prevented from calling on constitutional principles But routine resolution of commercial cases by reference to such principles is to be avoided: complicates litigation with little gain and impedes legislative development: Cf. McGeveran (2008) Trade mark owners will respond in kind: Arts 17(2), 16 and 47 of the Charter Cf. Miss World Ltd v Channel 4 [2007] ETMR 66

A false dichotomy? Internal ‘balancing’ by reference to free speech principles is neither necessary nor desirable If confusion is absent harm is not established; if confusion is present then either free speech does not provide a coherent basis for an exception or there will be a countervailing compelled speech interest Broad understanding of compelled speech: West Virginia v Barnett 319 US 624 (1943); Wooley v Maynard 430 US 705 (1977) cf. Lee v McArthur [2016] NICA 39 (24 October 2016)

No prospect of confusion

No Justification for a defence? Louis Vuitton v Haute Diggity Dog 507 F 3d 252 (4th circuit, 2007)

If confusion exists speech interests cut both ways Smith v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc 537 F Supp 2d 1302 (ND Ga, 2008)

But what about dilution etc? Morrin and Jacoby (2000) 19 J Public Policy & Marketing 265: Hyatt legal services & Hyatt hotels Barclays Bank v Quistclose [1968] UKHL 4 Mattel Inc v MCA 296 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2002) twelve years on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwu6NrxVVFk

But what about dilution etc? What do we mean by a mark’s reputation (3 wholesome brands: Viagra, Coke and Victoria’s Secret?) (Cf. Handler 2016) Does the negative association transfer (or stick)? (Cf. Boshoff 2016) Free-riding: the myth of the incentivised brand creator?