1. Law 227: Trademarks & Unfair Competition Acquisition, Priority & “LOC” June 9, 2009 Jefferson Scher

2. TM & Unfair Comp — Day 3 Agenda Acquisition and Priority  Type of use required to acquire rights  Quantity and nature of use  Concurrent use based on geographic remoteness Likelihood of Confusion  Factors weighed

3. Ownership and Priority Key Principles When Rights Commence — RS §9  Word, name, symbol, device, or other designation (or combination thereof)  Distinctive of a person’s goods/services  Used in a manner that identifies those goods/services and distinguishes them from the goods/services of others

4. Acquiring Trademark Rights Use That Distinguishes — Hypothetical FRONTREAR

5. Acquiring Trademark Rights Federal Trademark Law Common Law scope of protection  Actual trading area  Reach of advertising  Reach of reputation The Stork Club Stork Club

6. Acquiring Trademark Rights Federal Trademark Law BOZO’S pit BBQ restaurant?

7. Acquiring Trademark Rights Working Through A Hypothetical Sports Galore hypothetical (p. 126) — what rights at each point?  Jan: Form company, register domain  Feb: T-shirts mfd w/name, not yet sold  Feb: Web site contest to choose logo  Mar: Marketing campaign launched  Apr: Site launch (uses logo), T-shirt sold

8. Likelihood of Confusion The Multiple Factor Test Polaroid (2d Cir.)  Strength of plaintiff’s mark  Similarity of marks  Proximity of goods * Sleekcraft (9th Cir.)  Strength of plaintiff’s mark  Similarity of marks  Proximity of goods  Marketing channels used (#7) * May include consideration of the channels through which the goods are sold and promoted.

9. Likelihood of Confusion The Multiple Factor Test Polaroid (2d Cir.)  Likelihood that plaintiff will bridge the gap  Actual confusion  Defendant’s good faith in adopting the mark Sleekcraft (9th Cir.)  Likelihood of expansion of product lines  Actual confusion  Defendant’s intent in adopting the mark

10. Likelihood of Confusion The Multiple Factor Test Polaroid (2d Cir.)  Quality of Defendant’s product or service  Sophistication of the buyers  Etc. Sleekcraft (9th Cir.)  Degree of care exercised by purchasers  Etc.

11. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case AMF used SLICKCRAFT and this logo: Sleekcraft Boats used SLEEKCRAFT and this logo:

12. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case Similarity of Marks Proximity of Goods

13. Likelihood of Confusion Analogy to Economics 101 Price Quantity Nonexistent demand

14. Likelihood of Confusion Analogy to Economics 101 Price Quantity Oprah endorses your product Severed finger found in your product

15. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case Similarity of Marks Proximity of Goods Infringement Zone

16. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case Similarity of Marks Proximity of Goods Weak mark Strong mark

17. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case Similarity of Marks Proximity of Goods Heightened Care

18. Likelihood of Confusion The Sleekcraft Case Similarity of Marks Proximity of Goods Infringement Zone Weak mark High customer care Logo

19. TM & Unfair Comp — Up Next Topics and Reading for Day 4 Green Team “On” More LOC Cases and Contexts  Chapter 6, pp. 335-370, 403-417  Supplement pp. 40-42