Juridical Limits of Trademark Use: Name Sharing in Trademark Law and Practice in Nigeria

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adebambo ADEWOPO
Keyword(s):  
Trademark Law ◽  
Trademark Use

Trademark Use and Liability of Referencing Service In Keyword Advertising – Google AdWords and Trademark Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 450-454
Author(s):  
Christian Volkmann
Keyword(s):  
Trade Mark ◽  
Internet User ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Keyword Advertising ◽  
Trademark Use

Cases C-236/08 to C-238/08 Google France SARL, Google Inc. v. Louis Vuitton Malletier SA (C.236/08) and Google France SARL v. Viaticum, Luteciel SARL (C-237/08) and Google France SARL v. Centre national de recherche en relations humaines (CNRRH) SARL, Pierre-Alexis Thonet, Bruno Raboin, Tiger SARL (C-238/08)1. The proprietor of a trade mark is entitled to prohibit an advertiser from advertising, on the basis of a keyword identical with that trade mark which that advertiser has, without the consent of the proprietor, selected in connection with an internet referencing service, goods or services identical with those for which that mark is registered, in the case where that advertisement does not enable an average internet user, or enables that user only with difficulty, to ascertain whether the goods or services referred to therein originate from the proprietor of the trade mark or an undertaking economically connected to it or, on the contrary, originate from a third party.

scholarly journals Grounding Trademark Law Through Trademark Use

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
Specific Instruction ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Trademark Infringement ◽  
Consumer Confusion ◽  
Contributory Infringement ◽  
Trademark Use ◽  
Ip Law ◽  
Direct Infringement

The debate over trademark use has become a hot-button issue in intellectualproperty (IP) law. In Confusion over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law,Graeme Dinwoodie and Mark Janis characterize it as a dispute over whetherto limit trademark holder rights in a new and unanticipated way. Yet thereis another - in our view more historically accurate - way to frame thetrademark use debate: the question is whether courts should, absentspecific statutory authorization, allow trademark holders to assert a newand unprecedented form of trademark infringement claim. The pop-up andkeyword cases involve attempts to impose third-party liability under theguise of direct infringement suits. Dinwoodie and Janis's thorough accountnotwithstanding, it remains the fact that, before the recent spate ofInternet-related cases, no court had ever recognized a trademark claim ofthe sort that trademark holders are now asserting. Trademark infringementsuits have always involved allegations of infringement by parties who usemarks in connection with the promotion of their own goods and services. Thequestion raised by the trademark use cases, as we view it, is whethercourts should countenance a radical departure from that traditional modelwithout specific instruction from Congress. We think they should not.In this paper, we explain the origins of trademark use doctrine intraditional limits on the scope of the trademark right and in thedistinction between direct and contributory infringement. We also explainwhy we cannot simply rely on the likelihood of consumer confusion test tosolve the problems the trademark use doctrine addresses, and we examine thedifficult problem of defining the scope of the trademark use doctrine.

Athlete Trademarks

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra J. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Capital ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Trademark Protection ◽  
General Goals ◽  
Trademark Use

This chapter examines the protectability and registration of athletes’ names, nicknames, and catchphrases as trademarks under federal law. More and more athletes are seeking to register their names, nicknames, catchphrases, and fan slogans as federal trademarks in an attempt to monetize their fame and cultural capital. However, their goals in filing those applications are not often in accord with the traditional goals of trademark law. After providing an overview on trademark use and registration, the chapter discusses some of the limitations for trademark protection, including those based on distinctiveness, false association, and confusion. It also explains how trademark doctrines affect athletes’ ability to protect certain words or phrases as trademarks. Finally, it considers how the general goals of trademark law correspond to an athlete’s desire to protect words and phrases associated with him or her and prevent others from appropriating them.

From cultural symbols to commercial marks: a quantitative analysis of the trademark law protection of intangible cultural heritage in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-182
Author(s):  
zONGKUI Luo ◽  
Fang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Intangible Cultural Heritage ◽  
Cultural Symbols ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Registration Data ◽  
The Status ◽  
Trademark Protection ◽  
Trademark Use

The issue of trademark law protection of intangible cultural heritage (ICH) is inevitably encountered in the conversion from cultural symbols to commercial marks. Although academic circles are still discussing this, the practice has already begun. This paper investigates the status of the trademark law protection of ICH in China from the perspective of the application and registration data of ICH trademarks. According to a quantitative analysis of 12 123 items of ICH trademark searching data in China, it can be seen that the trademark protection of ICH is not optimistic, the trademark use of ICH symbols is in a disordered state, and many ICH trademark applications may cause distortion, derogation, or dilution to the connotation of the ICH. As a result, excluding trademark squatting by outsiders and decentralized registrations by indigenous peoples, and orderly utilizing of ICH symbols under a collective trademark or a certification trademark, should be determined as the basic goal of trademark law protection of ICH. To achieve this goal, the solution of ‘exclusion plus unified utilization’ should be adopted in practice. According to this plan, indigenous peoples, the trademark office, courts, and the Center of ICH Protection need to collaborate and improve the trademark law protection of ICH through awareness-raising, actions, institutions, and information.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document