II.    Trademark (Cont'd)

       F.    Superior rights (First use, prior use)

                1.    First continuous use

                2.    Priority of use                   X_________________//___Y

                3.    Federal registration = exclusive right to use nationally except for prior common law use

                                                                                        TRADEMARK LIFE

                        Supplemental    ~~~   5 years   ~~~     Principal    ~~~    5 years    ~~~     Incontestability

                4.    Incontestability - § 15 [1065]

                        a.    Benefits of incontestability

                                1.    Not subject to interference proceeding

                                2.    Conclusive evidence rule --  § 33(b)

                                3.    Defense to infringement suit

                       b.    Mark may be canceled on fewer grounds --  § 14(c)-(e) [1064]

                                1.    Generic

                                2.    Abandonment

                                3.    Fraudulent registration

                                4.    Improper registration

                                5.    Use of mark to misrepresent source

            5.    Priority in time problems -- p. 283

    G.    Concurrent use

            1.   HYPO:

                    A and B both sell cotton clothing under mark NATU-REL
                    A sells East coast
                    B sells on gulf coast

            2.    PTO will allow concurrent use registration if:

                    a.    1st registrant entitled to national registration limited to extent of prior use by another before federal application, and

                    b.    It determines that confusion, mistake or deception is not likely

            3.    HYPO:

                    A sells his NATU-REL clothing nationally
                    B sells fabric used in clothing under same mark

            4.    Natural zone of expansion

                   a.    Geographical

                    b.    Products/goods -- factors

                            1.    Are purchasers likely to assume that X is involved in both lines

                            2.    Are competitors of the first user also producing second line of products?

                            3.    Was prior user already engaged in the second line but under another mark?

                            4.    Are distribution channels similar?

                            5.    Are raw materials used for manufacturing closely allied?

        H.    Adoption, affixation and use

               HYPO:

                 X announces BURPY COLA
                 Examiner rejects

                1.    Has mark been affixed to goods?

                 2.    Also mark must be used in commerce

        J.    Infringement

              1.    Test = consumer confusion

                    a.    Confusion as to source or origin

                    b.    Confusion as to sponsorship
 
 

            2.    Factors (Polaroid factors):

                    a.    Similarity of marks

                    b.    Similarity of goods

                    c.    Strength of mark

                    d.    Similarity of trade channels

                    e.    Sophistication of buyers

                    f.    Degree of care likely to be exercised by buyers

                    g.    D's bad faith in selecting mark

                    h.    Bridging the gap

                    i.    Existence of actual confusion

            3.    Consumer confusion -- question of law or fact?

            4.    Noncompeting goods

                  HYPO:

                    V8       B8

                     a.     Test = Is reasonably prudent purchaser likely to be confused as to source, connection, sponsorship?

                      b.    Related goods theory today

                      c.    HYPO:

                            A manufactures women's shoes under KICKERS mark
                            A then begins to make man's shoes under same mark

                            A uses same mark on  women's clothing

                            A's expansion is into women's bicycles

                    d.    Closely related goods = those that are reasonably interchangeable by buyers for the same purpose

                            1.    Lanham Act --  § 32 [1114] = likelihood of confusion regardless of nature of goods and competitive nature
|                                  of goods or parties.

                            2.    Test for likelihood of confusion = similar to Polaroid factors

                    e.    Opposite of related goods = "foreign goods"

                            1.    No likelihood of confusion

                            2.    But, diversification

                    f.    Insignia, emblems, etc.

                          HYPO:

                            UNC has trademark on various UNC logos
                            X begins to make sweaters with UNC logo

        K.    Dilution

                1.    "Where there's life, there's BUD"

                2.    Types of dilution

                        1.    Blurring

                        2.    Tarnishment

                3.    Federal Trademark Dilution Act -  § 43(c)

                        a.    Factors to consider:

                                1.    Degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness

                                2.    Duration and extent of use of mark

                                3.    Duration and extent of advertising

                                4.    Geographical extent of trading area in which used

                                5.    Channels of trade

                                6.    Degree of recognition of mark within channels of trade

                                7.   Nature and extent of use of same or similar mark by 3d parties

                                8.    Whether registered under earlier Acts or on principal register

                    b.    Much litigation after 1996 -- three issues

                            1.    Retroactivity of Act

                            2.    Point at which there was enough fame of mark to proceed

                            3.    Bases on which dilution should be defined and proved.

    L.    Parody

            1.    Growing area for litigation

            2.    TM parody = Making light of features of the mark, the owner or the product

            3.    Likelihood of confusion

                    a.    Owners may lose if cannot prove likelihood of confusion -- See Everyready Battery Co. v. Adolph Coors
                            Co., 765 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ill. 1991)

                    b.    Lack of confusion not fatal to victims of TM parody.

            4.    Sample cases

                    a.    Girl Scouts of U.S. v. Personality Posters Mfg. Co., 304 F. Supp. 1228 (S.D.N.Y, 1969)

                    b.    Pillsbury Co., v. Milky Way Productions, Inc., 215 U.S.P.Q. 124 (N.D. Ga. 1981)

                    c.    L.L. Bean, p. 320

            5.    Parody = a kind of fair use

    M.    Domain names and cybersquatting

            1.    Toeppen

            2.    Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act -  § 43(d)

                    a.    Liable if domain name i:

                            1.    Identical or confusingly similarity to a distinctive mark or

                            2.    Identical or confusingly similarity or dilutive of a famous mark

                            3.    Is protected under U.S. Code (Red Cross, Olympic marks)

                    b.    Proof of bad faith

                            1.    Legitimate mark or other IP rights in domain name, is it holder's own name

                            2.    Any prior use of domain name in bona fide offering of goods or services

                            3.    Intent to divert consumers for commercial gain or for tarnishment or disparagement

                            4.    Attempt to sell domain name without bona fide offering or intent to offer goods or services

                            5.    Providing false or misleading contact information in registration

                            6.    Has holder acquired other domain names similar to other trademarks

                            7.    How distinctive or famous is the  mark

                    c.    Morrison & Foerster LLP v. Wick, 60 P.T.C.J. 53 (D. Colo. 2000)

            3.    Other domain name and web use of marks issues

                    a.    New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants v. Eric Louis Assocs. Inc., 4 Elec. Comm. & L.
                            Repts. 1153 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

                    b.    Playboy Enterprises v. Terri Wells, 78 F. Supp.2d 1077 (S.D. Cal. 1999)

                    c.    Brookfield Communications v. West Coast Entertainment Corp., 174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999)

        N.    Collateral use

                1.    HYPO:

                        X makes soft drinks under mark WHOOPPEE COLA
                        Y purchases   WHOOPEE COLA and rebottles into small bottles

                2.   Questions

                        a.    Quality impairment

                        b.    At what point must add "Rebottled by Y"?

                3.    Reconditioned goods

                4.    Damaged goods

                        HYPO:

                        A produces canned biscuits -- expiration date printed on cans
                        B purchases  expired cans and resells them

                        B sells under A's trademark

                5    Collateral use cases

                        a.    San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. U.S. Olympic Committee, cited note 8, p. 206

                        b.    General Foods Corp. v. Mellis, 203 U.S.P.Q. 261 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)

                        c.    Rolex Watch v. Michel Co., 58 P.T.C.J. 176 (9th Cir. 1999).

                6.    Comparison advertising

                7.    Other permissible uses of another's mark

                        a.    Use by licensees,

                        b.    Use by related companies, and

                        c.    Use by distributors.

        O.   Trademark remedies

                1.    Injunctive relief -- Likelihood of confusion only

                        a.     Preliminary

                        b.    Permanent

                                1.    Cease infringing

                                2.    Take affirmative action

                2.    Damages -- Actual confusion

                        a.    Damages -- must show lost sales, etc.

                                1.    Knowledge and intent

                                2.    Notice = ® or cease and desist letter

                        b.    D's profits

                                1.    Show bad faith by D

                                2.    Or deceptiveness

                        c.    Reasonable royalty rate

                        d.    Treble damages

                        e.    No punitives under Act

                   3.    Attorneys fees

                    4.    Criminal penalties