Trademarks IV Infringement of Trademarks 2 Class 22 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Executive Perspective for Scientists & Engineers (EPSE) A Real World Look at IP Infringement Randall K. Broberg, Esq. April 8, 2013.
Advertisements

Trademarks Kieran G. Doyle Long Island Import Export Association.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School November 9, 2004 Dilution (cont’d)
Worldwide. For Our Clients. Trademark Dilution Law in the United States September 14, 2004.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 18, 2007 Trademark – Defenses - Abandonment.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 11, 2007 Trademark – Dilution.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School September 14, 2004 Trade Dress - Part 2.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School August 31, 2004 Introduction.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 8, 2009 Dilution.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 6, 2009 Trademark – Defenses – Functionality.
Intellectual Property
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 9, 2008 Trademark – Dilution.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 2, 2008 Dilution.
Intellectual Property
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School March 30, 2009 Trademark – Infringement.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 11, 2008 Trademark – Domain Names.
Trademark Dilution Intro to IP - Prof Merges
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School April 9, 2008 Domain Names.
Defenses Intro IP – Prof Merges Agenda Genericide Functionality Abandonment Parody/Nominative Use.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 1, 2009 Trademark – Domain Names.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 13, 2007 Trademark – Genericide, Functionality.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School April 14, 2008 Trademark – Genericide, Functionality.
Click your mouse anywhere on the screen to advance the text in each slide. After the starburst appears, click a blue triangle to move to the next slide.
Trademark Fair Use and Parody Intro to IP Prof Merges
Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw 4 Areas of Intellectual Property Law 4 Areas of Intellectual Property Law  Trademarks  Patents  Copyrights  Trade.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School March 31, 2008 Trademark - Distinctiveness.
Trademark and Unfair Comp. Boston College Law School September 9, 2004 Trade Dress - Part 1.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School March 23, 2009 Trademark - Intro, Subject Matter.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar Steve Baron Bradley IM 350 Fall 2010.
Intellectual Property OBE 118 Fall 2004 Professor McKinsey Some property, very valuable property, exists only in our minds, in our imagination. It is intangible.
LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS Topics Discussed in Chapter –Intellectual Property-United States –Extraterritorial Application of US Law –Gray Market.
P A R T P A R T Crimes & Torts Crimes Intentional Torts Negligence & Strict Liability Intellectual Property & Unfair Competition 2 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Business.
INTRODUCTION TO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW Professor Fischer Class 1: Introduction August 20, 2009.
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.
Intellectual Property and Internet Law
Trademarks and Fair Use: Some Rules of the Road Corynne McSherry Staff Attorney.
Chapter 25 Intellectual Property Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written.
Chapter 7 Intellectual Property and Cyber Piracy
7.1 Chapter 7 Trademarks © 2003 by West Legal Studies in Business/A Division of Thomson Learning.
© 2007 by West Legal Studies in Business / A Division of Thomson Learning CHAPTER 7 Intellectual Property.
Trademarks IV Domain Names & Trademarks Class 23 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.
Introduction to Intellectual Property Class of November Copyright Remedies Trademarks: Protectable Marks, Distinctiveness.
Unless otherwise noted, the content of this course material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
An Overview of Intellectual Property Law, Policy, and Controversy Michael J. Madison University of Pittsburgh School of Law February 16, 2006.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar
Chapter 08.  Describes property that is developed through an intellectual and creative process  Inventions, writings, trademarks that are a business’s.
Intellectual Property Patents & Trademarks TC 310 June 19, 2008.
Trademarks I Introduction to Trademarks Class Notes: March 26, 2003 Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 24 Intellectual Property.
Intellectual Property Chapter 5. Intellectual Property Property resulting from intellectual, creative processes—the products of an individual’s mind.
Trademark Cases And now for something confusingly similar
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.
Copyright III Class 5 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner Copyright © R. Polk Wagner Last updated: 6/3/2016 2:47:50 AM.
Copyright VII Class Notes: February 14, 2003 Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
To clarify... Constitutional law: dictates power of government and fundamental rights – Copyright/Patent laws stem from Constitution Statutory law: acts.
Intro to IP Class of November Trademark Dilution, Cybersquatting, False Advertising.
Trademark Dilution Intro to IP - Prof Merges
1 Trademark Infringement and Dilution Steve Baron March 6, 2003.
Copyright III Class Notes: January 29, 2003 Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
Trademarks II Establishment of Trademark Rights Class 20 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner.
Chapter 18 The Legal Aspects of Sport Marketing. Objectives To introduce the key legal concepts and issues that affect the marketing of the sport product.
Defenses & Remedies Intro IP – Prof Merges
©2002 by West Legal Studies in Business A Division of Thomson Learning Chapter 6 Business Torts, Intellectual Property and Cyberlaw.
How to IRAC a Case Issue Rule Analysis Conclusion.
Trademarks III Infringement of Trademarks
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND CYBER PIRACY
Trademark Parody: Have We Lost Our Sense of Humor?
Trade Mark Protection Trade mark.
Chapter 3: Trademarks in E-Commerce.
Presentation transcript:

Trademarks IV Infringement of Trademarks 2 Class 22 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner

2/10 Today’s Agenda 1.Cleanup: Dilution 2.Defenses a)Genericness b)Functionality

3/10 Dilution Nabisco, Inc. v. PF Brands (2nd Cir. 1999) What is the trademark at issue? Why is the issue dilution, rather than likelihood of confusion? (Should dilution apply where competing uses do not result in confusion?) What does the court mean by the ‘dual role’ of distinctiveness in the analysis? What does the court mean by the possibility of ‘bridging the gap’? Why does the court reject the claim that actual proof of dilution is required?

4/10 Dilution Details of the Dilution Approach 1.Types of Dilution (Why do these mean?) Blurring Tarnishment 2.Fame What is required to show ‘fame’? What kind of evidence? Does ‘fame’ mean ‘famous within a narrow market’ or ‘generally famous’?

5/10 Dilution Distinction b/w Likelihood of Confusion & Dilution Likelihood of Confusion Dilution Key Analysis consumer confusion diminishment of distinctive quality of mark Types of Marks Eligible distinctive, or … descriptive w/ secondary meaning “famous” and distinctive Type of infringing use required Use in commerce ‘commercial use in commerce’ Competing uses or goods required? YesNo Actual harm required No Yes (circumstantial evidence okay)

6/10 Defenses Trademark Defenses: 1.Genericness 2.Functionality 3.Abandonment 4.Parody / Fair Use

7/10 Defenses Genericness Murphy Door Bed Co (2nd Cir. 1989) When will a mark become generic? Who bears the burden of proving genericness? Explain the difference in analysis: oGenericness via common usage oGenericness via expropriation How do you prevent ‘genericide’? Are there policy problems with this? Is it ‘unfair’ to declare a mark generic? How might this possibility affect the incentive to invest in marks? (Consider: what is the value of a mark just at the point of genericness?) How should we deal with buy.com?

8/10 Defenses Functionality TrafFix Devices v Marketing Displays (USSC 2001) Why not allow protection for functional items? (Even with secondary meaning?) How do you defend against a claim that your trade dress is ‘functional’? How is the existence of an expired utility patent relevant to this question? What is the test for ‘functionality’ oHow do you deal with trade dress that is both functional and ‘expressive’? (Note in ©: you could copy the ‘idea’ but not the expression.) oIs stating the test in terms of competition helpful? (Won’t this have the effect of penalizing successful trade dress development?)

9/10 Defenses Parody and Nominative Use Mattel v MCA Records (9th Cir. 2002) Why does the court quickly set aside the likelihood of confusion analysis? (Isn’t MCA using the mark?) Why does the court suggest that First Amendment concerns are more significant in the dilution context? Do you agree with the court that MCA’s use of the mark is ‘noncommercial’ under the statute? (What is the court reading in to the statutory provisions?) Note also the New Kids On the Block Case (p ): Why is this use of the mark noninfringing? What does the court mean by the term ‘nominative use’?

10/10 Next Class Trademarks V Domain Names and Trademarks