Trademark Law. Federal Trademark Dilution Act. Sixth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Need Not Show Actual Harm to Prove Dilution. V Secret Catalogue, Inc. v. Moseley, 259 F.3d 464 (6th Cir. 2001)

2001 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 731 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-200
Author(s):  
Sungho Cho ◽  
J. Lucy Lee ◽  
June Won ◽  
Jong Kwan (Jake) Lee

Under the federal trademark law, owners of famous sport trademarks may bring legal claims against unauthorized users of their marks under the infringement and dilution theory. Although the rationale of trademark infringement has been supported by various notions of consumer psychology and law and economics, the theory of dilution has been criticized for the lack of empirical support. This study investigated whether the junior use of major sport trademarks would have dilutive effects on the senior marks in financial terms. The study employed the contingent valuation method, a technique designed to estimate the economic values of nonpecuniary assets such as trademarks. A total of 140 subjects were exposed to dilutive information while they purchased sport brand merchandise. A series of pre- and posttests revealed that moderately famous sport trademarks suffered dilutive harm from junior use, whereas exceptionally famous marks were immune to the dilutive effects. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.


2021 ◽  
pp. 16-34
Author(s):  
Anuttama Ghose ◽  
S. M. Aamir Ali

Trademarks of an establishment cannot solely be associated with identification of origin or source. It performs an imperative task of building brand name and value. The dilution theory rejects the opinion that the role of a trademark is solely based on the recognition of the root or source of its origin and that it is not only a figurative representation but carries a creative aspect as well. For the most recent decade, the greatest inquiry in trademark law has been the manner by which to demonstrate weakening or dilution. Dilution has turned out to be a dauntingly slippery idea. The principal issue with dilution law is that it gives a cure without a supportable hypothesis of the harm or damage. Even though lately the concept has been recognized in International as well as domestic jurisdiction putting an immense responsibility on domestic jurisdiction to protect trademarks against dilution, very little has been discussed or clarified regarding the theory of dilution. Ambiguity of such nature facilitated this research trying to spot some light on the theory of dilution comparing it from divergent angles in different jurisdictions. The paper also highlights the interpretation mechanism of the courts of the dilution provision and explains the concept further with reference to important cases under the U.S. laws and European judgments in the context of the Dilution laws and draws a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of the legal framework present in India with that of the USA.


Author(s):  
Ann Bartow

A judicial determination of “likelihood of confusion” is the linchpin of successful trademark infringement actions in the United States, and is often useful to prevail on a trademark dilution cause of action as well. Such determinations are exceedingly subjective, and often seem premised on a very low estimation of the intelligence and powers of discernment of the typical consumer. Many appear virtually pretextual, simply adopted as a necessary step in “protecting” trademarks and according trademark holders broad property-like rights that can impair competition and silence free speech. Though seemingly irrational and generally socially undesirable, U.S. “likelihood of confusion” jurisprudence has gained a foothold in cyberspace through dispute-resolution procedures addressing disputes about Internet domain names. In consequence, trademark holders generally prevail and are increasingly seen as holding inchoate rights in any domain name containing, alluding to, or similar to their trademarks across the globe, even though U.S. trademark law logically should not have extraterritorial application.


2016 ◽  
Vol 0 (27) ◽  
pp. 175-195
Author(s):  
Washington Macías Rendón ◽  
◽  
Gerardo Balcázar Ordoñez ◽  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document