Law 227: Trademarks & Unfair Competition

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

2. TM & Unfair Comp — Day 3Agenda • 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 PriorityKey Principles Review • 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 RightsUse That Distinguishes — Hypothetical FRONT REAR

5. The Stork Club Stork Club Acquiring Trademark RightsFederal Trademark Law • Common Law scope of protection • Actual trading area • Reach of advertising • Reach of reputation

6. Acquiring Trademark RightsFederal Trademark Law • BOZO’S pit BBQ restaurant?

7. Acquiring Trademark RightsWorking 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. 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) Likelihood of ConfusionThe Multiple Factor Test * May include consideration of the channels through which the goods are sold and promoted.

9. 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 Likelihood of ConfusionThe Multiple Factor Test

10. 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. Likelihood of ConfusionThe Multiple Factor Test

11. Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case • AMF used SLICKCRAFT and this logo: • Sleekcraft Boats used SLEEKCRAFT and this logo:

12. Similarityof Marks Proximity of Goods Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case

13. Price Nonexistentdemand Quantity Likelihood of ConfusionAnalogy to Economics 101

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

15. Similarityof Marks InfringementZone Proximity of Goods Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case

16. Similarityof Marks Proximity of Goods Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case Weak mark Strong mark

17. Similarityof Marks Proximity of Goods Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case Heightened Care

18. Similarityof Marks InfringementZone Proximity of Goods Likelihood of ConfusionThe Sleekcraft Case High customer care Logo Weak mark

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