Plaintiff « Trademark Law Litigation

March 3, 2009

D

Damages :

A monetary amount awarded to the plaintiff by the court in order to compensate the plaintiff for actual injury sustained by the actions of the defendant. In trademark cases, the basis of damages is typically the plaintiff’s lost profits or defendant’s profits as a result of the infringing activity, and may include prejudgment interest. Additionally, damages have been based on a reasonable royalty or a the cost of corrective advertising. Finally, the court may award treble damages to the plaintiff where the court deems such damages as equitable and not punitive.

Database, trademark :

Many businesses now provide over the Internet databases of existing and pending trademarks, which the user can search, usually for a very reasonable fee. The services vary in their timeliness and whether or not state trademark registrations are available. The only free database is maintained by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) itself, and can be accessed on the Internet at http://www.USPTO.GOV/tmdb/index.html. While this site provides a decent replacement to the CASSIS databases located in specific depository libraries around the country, it can be anywhere from several days to a couple months old. Furthermore, it does not include common law marks nor state registrations. As such, it should be used only as a means of eliminating potential marks prior to investing any money on a more comprehensive search.

Date of first use :

The date a mark was first used anywhere. In the United States, the first to use a mark generally has priority, and can exclude all subsequent users of identical or confusingly similar marks.

Date of first use in commerce :

To secure a date of first use in commerce the mark owner must use the mark in trade in a manner that allows consumers to rely on it to identify and discriminate between the user’s goods or services from those of competitors’. Furthermore, since the authority for the Trademark Act is based on the interstate commerce clause, the user must also demonstrate use in interstate commerce in order to obtain a federal registration. The interstate commerce requirement is met so long as use of the mark in trade includes activity that either crosses state lines or affects interstate commerce directly or indirectly such as by selling products or services to interstate travelers.

Dates, priority :

A priority date is the date used to determine which of two opposing parties in a trademark dispute should prevail. Generally speaking, the one with the earliest priority date wins. The United States is one of few countries in the world that deems the date a mark was first used to be the priority date. Most other countries set the priority date as the date a mark was first registered. One exception to the U.S. system of setting priority dates is for the Intent to Use application, in which the priority date is becomes the date the application was filed rather than the date the mark is first used.

Deceptive marks :

These are marks that cannot be registered as trademarks because they mischaracterize or mislead consumers as to the underlying product. The usual test for determining whether or not a mark is deceptive is: (1) the mark misdescribes the character, quality, function, composition or use of the underlying product; (2) purchasers are likely to believe that the misdescription actually describes the goods; and (3) purchasers are likely to rely upon the misdescription in making their purchasing decision. Some courts have simply looked for an intent do deceive, instead of apply this test. In any event, if the mark is misleading, but does not qualify for being a deceptive mark because, perhaps, the mark’s owner had no bad intent, or because there is not likely to be any reliance by purchasers on the misleading description, then the mark is a deceptively misdescriptive mark.

Deceptively misdescriptive marks :

Deceptively misdescriptive marks are those that incorrectly describe features of the underlying services or goods to which the mark is affixed. Like deceptive marks, deceptively misdescriptive marks tend to mislead consumers as to the underlying product. However, deceptively misdescriptive marks do not meet the requirements of a deceptive mark (i.e. bad intent or reliance by purchasers upon the misdescription). As such, deceptively misdescriptive marks can be registered on the Principal Register once they acquire secondary meaning.

De facto secondary meaning

De facto secondary meaning exists where an interest in the public good overrides the protection of a mark that otherwise serves to identify source for consumers and has acquired secondary meaning. De facto secondary meaning exists when a mark is generic or functional. These types of marks can never be granted exclusive rights, even if the mark owner has done everything possible to preserve rights in the mark through proper usage, policing or a heavy advertising campaign resulting in secondary meaning. There is a strong public interest in allowing competitors to all use words that inform the public about the nature of their goods, but doing so is nearly impossible if exclusive rights are granted in the words necessary to describe a product. For this reason, the doctrine of de facto secondary meaning precludes the granting of monopoly powers available under trademark law.

Defendant’s profits as damages :

Where the plaintiff cannot show harm from lost profits, some courts may still award any of defendant’s profits in order to avoid unjust enrichment of the defendant, but such an award is reserved for when the defendant intentionally infringed plaintiff’s mark. If awarded, defendant’s profits are calculated by plaintiff proving defendant’s gross sales, and then defendant proving any deductions based on overhead, operating expenses, materials or labor. Documentary evidence is typically required for defendant to prove any deductions.

Defenses to dilution :

The following provide a bar or defense to a claim of trademark dilution: (1) the mark used is a federally registered trademark (only bars claims of dilution brought under state or common law; not those under the federal law); (2) use of a famous mark by another person in comparative advertising to identify the competing goods or services; (3) noncommercial use of a mark; and (4) all forms of news reporting and news commentary. In addition to these defenses, which are all specifically identified in the Dilution Act, many of the same defenses for trademark infringement are also likely to apply. However, since the Federal Trademark Dilution Act is relatively new (1996), it is uncertain how the courts will interpret the applicability of these defenses.

Defenses to infringement :

A claim of trademark infringement can be responded to by either attacking plaintiff’s own trademark rights or else denying the existence of trademark infringement or dilution. The defendant may be able to argue the following defenses: (1) plaintiff abandoned the mark; (2) plaintiff engaged in fraud when registering or maintaining registration of the mark; (3) the mark is generic (4) plaintiff engaged in trademark misuse by using exclusive rights in the mark to violate the law; (5) plaintiff delayed unreasonably before asserting or enforcing rights against defendant (laches) and therefore should be stopped form claiming infringement (estoppel); (6) the mark is functional; (7) plaintiff’s explicit or implicit conduct reasonably offered assurances to defendant that plaintiff would permit defendant’s use of the mark (acquiescence); (8) defendant is not using the mark as a trademark, but merely to describe defendant’s own products (fair use); (9) defendant is not using the mark in a manner that is likely to cause confusion; (10) the First Amendment protects free expression, including certain uses of trademarks such as parody.

Depository libraries :
These are selected public libraries that house the CASSIS database containing all existing and pending federal trademarks maintained by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Beware that the these databases may be up to three months old before receiving updates from the USPTO. While they are usually free, there can sometimes be lines to get onto a host computer in the library. Alternatively, the USPTO now has available a searchable database over the Internet (still not timely updated). You can check their database at http://www.USPTO.GOV/tmdb/index.html.

Description of goods or services :

A description of goods or services is required in all applications for federal trademark registration. Descriptions should be limited to those goods and products which are currently being sold under the proposed mark (or will be sold, if an Intent to Use application is filed). According to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the description should be concise, not vague or overly broad, and should consist of the common commercial description of the goods or services. At the same time, broader descriptions have the potential, if not rejected by the USPTO Examiner, of ultimately providing broader protection. Thus, there is always a tension between drafting a description that is narrow enough to pass the examination, yet broad enough to offer protection out to the boundaries of the goods or services being registered.

Descriptive marks :

Trademarks that describe the ingredients, qualities, features, purpose or characteristics of a product or service. These marks are not inherently distinctive, and thus do not receive trademark protection unless they acquire distinctiveness through secondary meaning. Even if they qualify for trademark protection, descriptive marks are the weakest marks possible, and do not receive as broad of legal protection as suggestive, arbitrary and fanciful marks. Examples of descriptive marks include: BEEF & BREW for a restaurant, LASERGAGE for a laser measurement device, PIZZAZZ for pizza, and WORLD BOOK for encyclopedias. In contrast to suggestive marks, a mark that is merely descriptive immediately conveys knowledge of ingredients, qualities, or characteristics with no imaginative leap required. If a composite mark is not 100% descriptive, then the mark as a whole is not “merely descriptive.”

Designs, protection of :

Drawings or designs may be protected as a trademark as long as the drawing or design is used as a trademark. Generally speaking, if the design is an accurate or realistic portrayal of the goods or services that the mark serves to identify, then the mark is descriptive, and receives no protection unless the owner can demonstrate secondary meaning. However if the picture deviates from the underlying goods or services, then the design will be viewed as distinctive, and can receive protection. Common components such as basic geometric figures, stripes or even flowers may be seen as lacking distinctiveness unless the owner can demonstrate secondary meaning.

Dilution Statutes :

State and federal statutes that allow the owner of a famous trademark to prevent uses of its mark by other companies in such a way as to tarnish or blur the distinctiveness of the mark. Unlike lawsuits under a traditional trademark infringement lawsuit, the plaintiff in a dilution suit need not prove that there is a likelihood of confusion between the famous mark and the challenged mark.

Disclaimer, in a trademark registration :

A statement that the trademark applicant or owner does not claim exclusive rights in an unprotectable component of a federally registered mark.

Disclaimer, in conjunction with use of another person’s mark :

A statement by the user of another company’s trademark that the user is not affiliated with the trademark owner. Such a statement will not automatically relieve the user’s liability for trademark infringement. However, if the disclaimer is found by a court to be effective in eliminating consumer confusion as to the affiliation between the two companies. Thus, if the disclaimer is likely to be seen by those who see the trademark, then there is a good chance the disclaimer is effective in eliminating consumer confusion.

Distinctiveness :

The ability of a mark to allow the relevant consuming public to discriminate the source of a product or service. Distinctiveness is a prerequisite to trademark registration on the Principal Register. Fanciful, arbitrary, and suggestive marks are inherently distinctive, while descriptive marks are not distinctive unless used extensively enough to develop a certain level of market awareness, called secondary meaning.

Distinctiveness requirement :

The requirement by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that all marks listed on the Principal Register must be distinctive. Marks that are not distinctive may still be federally registered, but are only listed on the Supplemental Register, and do not have many of the benefits of registration on the Principal Register. Courts also require that a mark be distinctive in order for it to have any protection under the common law.

Documenting First Use :

Because trademark rights in the United States on a first to use basis, it is important to document the first date you use a mark. This may be done by taking a dated photograph of the goods bearing the mark or keeping the original advertising if it shows the date the ad ran. You should also keep records of the first sale of goods or services made using the mark. This may include a bill of sale or invoice. If you do not have a dated photograph or advertisement, you might want to notarize a statement on the back of a photo or ad such as “This photo was taken on 12/31/98,” or “This ad was placed on 12/31/98.” While this provides perhaps less convincing evidence than a dated photo or ad, it is far better than a photo or ad with no date.

Domain name
A component of an Internet address (URL) which is comprised of a top-level domain such as .com or .net and a second level domain, which is the part the domain name owner gets to make up. For more information visit:

http://www.dtip.net and http://www.domainsbuyerguide.com

Domain name hijacking :

A hijacker in this context is one who purchases one or many domain names, and attempts to sell them later on to the highest bidder — often a corporation owning a famous trademark that is identical to the second level domain being sold. This disparaging term is generally reserved for those individuals who purchased the name with no business purpose in mind other than to sell it to the trademark owner or keep it from the hijacker’s competitor. There are of course examples of legitimate businesses fighting over a single domain name as well. In the case of hijackers, the new Federal Trademark Dilution Act has been very effective in helping corporations with famous marks retain domain names consisting of their famous marks. However, there are also a few examples of corporations bullying people out of their domain names under the guise of trademark ownership, even though the particular use of a domain name does not constitute trademark infringement or dilution, or unfair competition in any manner. These latter kinds of cases are referred to as reverse domain name hijacking cases, and some have speculated that this conduct by companies may be met with cancellation of their mark under the doctrine of trademark misuse.

Domain dispute policy :

This refers to a policy developed by Internic (the body that registers most domain names in the U.S.) that can be invoked when two parties have a dispute over rights in a domain name. Typically, these disputes involves at least one party who claims the domain name infringes or dilutes their trademark rights. The policy has been revised a couple times in an effort to reduce the amount of litigation and hassles Internic has had to contend with. Currently the policy can be read at http://www.internic.net/domain-info/internic-domain-6.html The predominant feature of the policy (ver. 3) are that anyone who has a trademark registration issued by any country may ultimately stop the domain name owner who is using the registered trademark as a domain name. The policy has been severely criticized on the basis that it fails to accommodate the fact that trademark law permits use of the same mark for unrelated products or services. Internic’s policy has also been criticized because it unfairly favors owners of registered trademarks, even though trademark rights in this country are not granted by registration, but by use. Registrations are only effective under the dispute policy if they were obtained prior to the acquisition of the domain name. For this reason, trademark registration is more important than ever, if you plan to do business on the Internet.
Another important trademark registration consideration prompted by Internic’s current dispute policy is whether or not to register design features of marks. Internic’s policy currently excludes from its protection any trademarks incorporating a design. It appears from the plain language of the policy that Internic intended to exclude from protection all lingual marks that are portrayed with special typefaces or colors, as opposed to excluding only those marks that are registered specifically as design marks, which happen to have words in them as well. Thus, if you want to protect design features of a mark, be sure to register a text-only mark without claiming protection for typeface or color, etc., in addition to a registration with the design features.
Domestic representative :

A resident of the United States to whom service of process may be sent regarding the trademark. Foreign applicants for trademark registration are required to have a Domestic Representative unless they are also represented by an attorney in the United States.

Drawings, protection of :

Drawing page of trademark application :

All applications for trademark are required to be accompanied by a separate drawing page, even if the mark being registered is strictly text. In the case of lingual or text marks, you need only type the mark IN ALL CAPS. The trademark office has an elaborate set of very rigid regulations for submitting the drawing page, including codes for coloring, and a size limitation of 4″ x 4″.

Comments (0)

L

Filed under: Trademark Glossary — Tags: agreement, defense, dilution, infringement, Labels, Laches, Lanham Act, lawsuit, legal, Legal strength of a trademark, Letters, License, Licensee, Licensor, Likelihood of Confusion Test, lingual marks, Litigation, Lost profits, Measure of damages, Plaintiff, Trademark Act, Trademark litigation, trademark owner, trademark protection — admin @ 5:31 pm

Laches, defense of :

A defense based upon plaintiff’s inexcusable delay in asserting or attempting to enforce trademark rights. This doctrine is based on the theory that equity rewards the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights.

Labels, trademark protection of :

Labels on goods can be protected under trademark law if the features on the label for which trademark protection is claimed identifies source for consumers, and if such features are not functional. Product labels fall into a rapidly expanding area of trademark protection for trade dress.

Lanham Act :

Otherwise known as the Trademark Act of 1946, this statute provides protection against trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and false designation, description or representation. The act also governs procedures for federal trademark registration. The Act is contained in Title 15 of the United States code, sections 1051-1127.

Legal strength of a trademark :

Strength of a mark can be measured on two different levels; marketing strength and legal strength. Words that describe very closely the underlying good or service they represent have strong marketing potential, since such marks immediately communicate to customers what the product actually is or does. An example is “Quick Fix Radio Mix.” This tells the customer immediately that it is a substance that fixes radios quickly. The problem with using descriptive marks such as these is that they are weak from a legal perspective. The legal strength of a mark is generally measured by its distinctiveness, not its descriptiveness. In fact, distinctiveness and descriptiveness are almost two ends on the same spectrum. Generally speaking, the more distinctive the mark, the stronger is the legal protection available for that mark, but the less ability the mark has to communicate with the consumer. Distinctive marks are those that are coined or fanciful (made up), or suggestive (suggesting qualities of the underlying products, without plainly describing them).

Letters, trademark protection of :

Alphabetic and Alphanumeric characters can be protected under trademark law, and indeed comprise the most common form of trademark, otherwise known as textual or lingual marks. Such marks receive their broadest protection if they are used as trademarks in block-letter format, i.e. without specialized fonts, coloring or other stylized features. Alternatively, if lingual marks are used with stylized features, but registered as block letters alone, or used in a variety of different stylized formats, then protection can more reasonably extend to all similar configurations of letters.

License :

An agreement between a trademark owner and one or more other parties that allows the other parties to make limited, specified use of the trademark in question. Licensing of trademarks can result in the loss of the trademark unless the license arrangement provides for a certain degree of control over the licensed use.

Licensee :

The party to whom a trademark owner grants a license to use a trademark.

Licensor :

The trademark owner who is licensing a trademark to the trademark licensee(s).

Likelihood of Confusion Test :

An analysis of whether confusion is caused when the mark in question is used to identify the same or closely related goods or services as an existing mark. If the relevant consuming public will be confused or mistaken about the source of product or service sold using the mark in question, then likelihood of confusion exists, and that mark can be excluded from being used by the prior mark owner. The likelihood of confusion test is one of several examinations conducted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in determining whether to approve an applicant’s trademark application. The test is also used in trademark infringement lawsuits to determine whether or not the defendant is liable for infringement.

Lingual Marks :
These are trademarks in the form of either words or phrases, and are the most widely used kinds of marks. Depending on the meaning of the word or phrase, these marks have more or less legal strength.

Litigation :
A lawsuit. In order to litigate a trademark conflict, there must be a legal cause of action such as infringement or dilution. Trademark litigation often occurs on a very fast schedule since the plaintiff usually requests the court to grant a temporary injunction to stop the alleged trademark infringer from using the mark until the whole dispute can be resolved through a longer process. If a court grants the injunction, the defendant typically settles quickly and changes marks because the incentive for litigating a mark that cannot be used (at least in the short term) is obviously prohibitive since goodwill will have to be generated under a new name.

Lost profits, as a measure of damages :

The plaintiff’s lost profits may be awarded as damages in a trademark lawsuit, but monetary relief is generally reserved for cases of intentional infringement. To receive plaintiff’s lost sales as damages, the plaintiff must show that if it were not for the defendant’s infringing activities the plaintiff would have had a certain number of sales that were not in fact had. Proving this is often difficult since there may be a number of reasons besides defendant’s infringing use of the mark that could account for plaintiff’s lost sales. As such, a market survey may be necessary to prove such damages.

Comments (0)

M

Madrid Agreement :

The Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks is an international treaty signed originally in 1891. It is designed to simplify the filing of trademarks and service marks in different countries. The treaty provides for the international registration of an approved trademark by a single filing in one language, under one procedure, with the payment of one fee. Nationals of member countries must first register their trademark in the country of origin prior to international registration. For this reason, the treaty tends to favor countries having the least rigorous application procedures, and consequently the United States and Canada, having more elaborate trademark registration procedures, have declined to become signatories.

Mark :
Any trademark, service mark, certification mark, or collective mark.

Market survey :

Research conducted by an independent firm and used to support arguments before the US Patent and Trademark Office or civil courts when trying to prove various aspects of trademark viability. For example, a survey may be useful to prove that a mark has acquired secondary meaning, is not generic, is not functional, is legally strong, or is not likely to confuse consumers with regard to an existing trademark. Surveys can also be used to prove plaintiff’s lost profits, which is evidence that is notoriously difficult to obtain without a survey. According to Phyllis J. Welter, an expert on trademark surveys, the discussion of surveys in trademark litigation has grown from roughly 5.6% in the 1950’s to over 12% in the 1980’s. Ms. Welter’s book, Trademark Surveys, published in 1998 by West Group, is an excellent source of information on how to utilize surveys in trademark litigation.

Measure of damages :

Both the Lanham Act and the common law provide for two standard methods of calculating damages, if indeed damages are awarded at all. These are typically the plaintiff’s lost profits or defendant’s profits gained as a result of defendant’s infringing activity. Additionally, damages have been based on a reasonable royalty or a the cost of corrective advertising. Finally, the court may award treble damages and prejudgment interest to the plaintiff where the court deems such damages as equitable and not punitive.

Misdescriptive marks (deceptively misdescriptive) :

Misspelled words as marks :

Often business owners choose misspelled words that are phonetically similar to the correctly spelled word, in hopes of adding distinctiveness, or even perhaps as a marketing ploy. However, trademark law deems words that are misspelled, but otherwise descriptive of a product to be the same as the non-misspelled descriptive term for that product. For instance, “KUIK LOVEE” as a trademark for a convenience food item would be treated as a descriptive term in the same way as if the item were instead named “QUICK LOVE.”

Misuse of trademark :

An affirmative defense to trademark infringement. Misuse occurs when the trademark owner uses the mark in violation of the law, such as canceling a trademark license on the basis of illegal discrimination. Some legal scholars have also suggested that the misuse of a trademark should result in cancellation of a trademark registration where the trademark holder uses the registration to invoke Internic’s domain dispute policy when there is no valid argument for actual trademark infringement by the domain name owner. However, the US Patent and Trademark Office has never canceled a mark yet based on trademark use. Nonetheless, cancellation of patents and copyrights have occurred based on misuse, and it may be a matter of time before a similar precedent is set in trademark law.

Monetary relief :

Monetary relief is but one form of protection available to trademark owners under the Lanham Act. Monetary relief may include provable damages, attorneys fees, corrective advertising costs, lost profits (either defendants’ or plaintiffs’), prejudgment interest, punitive damages, reasonable royalty or treble damages. Monetary awards are not required when infringement has occurred. The court has wide discretion under “principles of equity” to grant or deny such relief, and frequently requires a finding of intentional infringement before making such a reward.

Monopoly :

A privilege vested in one or more parties consisting of the exclusive right to carry on a particular business or trade. In the case of trademark law, a monopoly specifically references the exclusive right to use a word, symbol, sound or trade dress, etc. in association with a particular kind of good or service.

Multiple-class application :
An application for Federal trademark registration in which the applicant seeks registration for more than one international class. The registrant must pay an additional registration fee ($245) for each class applied for.

Music, trademark protection of :

Trademark protection exists for any sounds or musical compositions to the extent that such music meets the requirements of a trademark. A famous example is the melody to “Sweat Georgia Brown” for the Harlem Globetrotters International.

Musical notation, trademark protection of :

Musical notes appearing with or without a staff are protected as long as they function as proper trademarks. As such, there is arguably no independent trademark protection against the printing of musical notes as a symbol identifying the specific song communicated by those notes, because they describe the music itself. Moreover, such notation would arguably be functional for the creation of that particular music. However, musical notation as a symbol for anything other than the song itself could operate as a trademark.

Comments (0)

P

Packaging, trademark protection of :

Protection is available for packaging as long as the elements claimed for trademark protection meet the requirements of a trademark. The elements that are protected may include the shape and color or overall coordination of these elements. However, only those elements that were designed specifically to promote the product are protected; not the functional features of packaging that have a utilitarian purpose.

Parallel Imports (Gray Market Goods) :

Goods that are not authorized for importation into the United States. These goods were legitimately sold outside the United States with the approval of the manufacturer, but were not supposed to be resold back into the United States. The importers of Gray Market Goods are attempting to benefit from the higher prices such goods command within the United States as compared to the country into which they were originally sold.

Paris Convention :

The International Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. This treaty was originally signed in 1883 and grants, among other things, trademark rights based upon national treatment to all nationals whose countries signed onto the convention. A trademark registration in one’s home country sets the priority date for registrations made in all other member countries.

Patent and Trademark Office :

Otherwise known as the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, this is the administrative body in the United States that oversees the registration and cancellation of trademarks on the Principal and Supplemental Register, as well as patents. Only attorneys can represent other parties before the USPTO, although individuals can represent their own companies. For trademark law, there is no special certification or license required for attorneys to practice before the USPTO. Trademark applications and all other correspondence should be addressed to “The Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks, 2900 Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3513.” Initial trademark applications should be directed to “Box NEW APP / FEE,” while amendments to allege use should be directed to “Attn. AAU,” and statements alleging use or requests for an extension of time to file a statement of use should be directed to “Box ITU / FEE.”

Patent :

The exclusive right to use or sell an invention. The government, under the auspices of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, grants such rights only to new, useful and non-obvious ideas for machines, processes or certain designs. Drafting patent applications is an art that some say takes years to develop well. Depending on how the application is drafted a patent can offer very weak and narrow protection, or rather robust and strong protection. Although Pliam Law Group, PA does not practice in the area of patent law, we do strongly recommend the investment in a good patent attorney, and will gladly make recommendations on where to find a good patent attorney.
(More information at : http://www.epatent.biz )

Patent attorney :

It is not necessary to have a patent attorney doing trademark related work. A patent attorney is typically an attorney with an engineering or other scientific degree, and who is specially licensed to handle patent matters before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Except insofar as the USPTO governs trademark registrations, patents and trademark have virtually nothing in common, and thus there is no need to have a patent attorney for trademark work.

Personal names, trademark protection of :

Traditionally, courts have been reluctant proscribe the use of one’s own name in business even when another business exists by the same name. As such, courts would try to craft injunctions to be as narrow as possible to permit use of a personal name. More recently, courts have become increasingly insensitive to any prohibition on using one’s own name, where such use creates a likelihood of confusion for consumers. Thus, trademarks consisting of a person’s own last name (surname) are generally protected under trademark law once the mark has acquired secondary meaning. First names may not need to acquire secondary meaning, however they receive very weak protection generally.

Petitioner :

The party to a cancellation proceeding who seeks to cancel the Federal registration of a trademark held by the registrant in such an action.

Physical features, protection of :

Shapes or physical features of products or their containers may receive trademark protection if those features are distinctive and non-functional.

Plaintiff :

The party who brings a lawsuit. In a trademark suit, the plaintiff may be claiming trademark infringement and/or dilution, or may simply be requesting in a declaratory judgment action for the court to make a determination of which party has prior rights in a mark, or whether there even exists a valid conflict between two marks. Standing to sue in a trademark lawsuit exists once someone claims infringement and threatens to take some action either through the courts or the appropriate administrative body. If this happens, the party accused of infringing a trademark can become the plaintiff in a declaratory judgment action and thereby can often receive the advantage of a more convenient forum.

Plaintiff’s lost profits as damages :

Prejudgment interest :

Interest awarded to a plaintiff in some jurisdictions for trademark infringement. Such interest may be calculated beginning from the date that infringement first began or the first date that plaintiff made a demand for settlement. When the ultimate damage award is large and the case protracted, prejudgment interest is not to be considered lightly.

Preliminary injunction (temporary injunction) :

An order from a court to prohibit or enforce certain conduct on a temporary basis until the court can make a determination based on all the facts and law of the case. The most common example of an injunction in trademark law is a court order to stop using a particular trademark. Since injunctive relief is an equitable remedy, the court will weigh the harm to defendant if the injunction is imposed against the harm to plaintiff if no injunction is ordered. The court will also require a bond to compensate the defendant in the event the injunction was wrongly ordered.

Presidents’ names, trademark protection for :

The Lanham Act specifically prohibits use of a President’s name as a trademark, if the President is alive, and has not given express written consent. If the President is deceased, but the President’s spouse is still alive, written consent must be obtained from the spouse before the President’s name may be used.

Prima facie evidence :

“Prima facie” is Latin for at first sight, or first appearance. Prima facie evidence is evidence that is sufficient on its face, and if not rebutted or contradicted will remain so.

Primarily geographically descriptive :

A term used in the manner of a trademark that conveys to the consumer a geographical connotation primarily or immediately. If the consumer is likely to believe that the underlying goods or services in fact come from that location, and that location is in fact the geographic origin of the underlying goods or services, then the mark is primarily geographically descriptive, and can be registered on the Supplemental Register, or on the Principal Register if the mark owner can demonstrate secondary meaning.

However, if the geographic term is not in fact the origin of the underlying goods or services, and the owner of the mark intended to deceive consumers with regard to geographic origin mark, or if the mark falsely induces purchasing decisions, then the mark may be geographically deceptive, and cannot be protected. A minority of courts look at the intent of the mark owner, while most courts look at whether or not consumers are likely to materially rely upon the misdescription. While proving intent with direct evidence is virtually impossible, courts may infer from the circumstances whether or not a person had bad intent. For this reason, it is probably a good idea to stay away from terms that falsely suggest qualities of a geographic region such as SWISS for watches not made in Switzerland, and WISCONSIN for Cheese not made in that state. Finally, after the U.S. implementation of TRIPs, the Lanham Act. 2(a) has been amended to include a prohibition against the registration of any geographical mark for wines or spirits not from the place indicated in the mark.

Principal Register

This is the primary registry of trademarks maintained by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In order to qualify for registration on the Principal Register, a trademark must be distinctive and currently in use. Trademarks that qualify for Principal Register registration receive the all the benefits of registration, whereas those registered on the Supplemental Register do not.

Priority date :

The date that determines who will prevail in a trademark infringement lawsuit. In the United States, the priority date is generally the date a trademark was first used. In most other countries, the priority date is based on whoever is first to file for a trademark registration.

Prior registration :

A trademark registration that was filed before another. In most countries other than the United States, the first to register a trademark as the right to exclude others from using that mark in a similar manner. While the United States generally grants priority based on use rather than registration, even in the United States rights outside of one’s area of use are granted on the basis of who is first to register (nationwide priority).

Prior rights :

Trademark rights owned by one party for a given mark prior, and which were established prior to the time a second party gains trademark rights in that same or a similar mark. In the U.S. the party who is the first to use a mark in commerce has the prior right to the mark, and as such can exclude all subsequent uses of the mark in the same geographic territory. However, in most other countries in the world, trademark rights are prioritized based on the first party to register a mark.

Prior use :

Use of a trademark that occurs before a confusingly similar use of that same mark. Such use by the second user infringes the first user’s trademark if the use by both parties is in the same geographic territory. In the United States, the first person to use a mark has prior rights, and may exclude all subsequent users of the mark in that territory.

Product design :

Product design consists of the variety of elements which constitute the configuration of the product. Product configurations are protected as long as they are distinctive, and operate like a trademark. However, only those elements that were designed specifically to promote the product are protected; not the functional features of trade dress that have a utilitarian purpose.

Protectability of a mark :

A mark is capable of being registered by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and protected in the courts as long as the mark (1) is not being used by someone else; (2) is not forbidden; (3) is distinctive; and (4) is being used in commerce to allow consumers to identify one brand, and distinguish it from others. If a mark is not distinctive, it may still be registered on the Supplemental Register, but it will not receive protection in the courts, nor will it receive the many benefits of a being on the Principal Register.

Protest letter :
A letter written to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in order to protest the registration of a mark.

Proof of Damages :

Proving damages is a necessary prerequisite of being awarded damages, yet doing so can be exceedingly difficult. If damages are awarded, they are typically measured by either the plaintiff’s lost profits, or defendant’s profits. In the case of plaintiff’s lost profits, proof issues are particularly tricky since many factors may result in a decline in plaintiff’s profits at any given time. A market survey may be useful here to demonstrate loss of reputation which can serve as circumstantial evidence of lost profits. When the award sought is defendant’s profits, all that plaintiff must prove is the amount of defendant’s gross sales. Then the burden shifts to the defendant to prove reasonable deductions from those sales.

Publication of trademark (Publication period) :

Once a mark has been approved by the Trademark Examining Attorney, the mark is published in the Official Gazette for 3 months. The purpose of publication is to notify existing mark owners of potentially infringing marks, and give them an opportunity to respond with a protest letter.

Punitive damages :

Punitive damages are those that a court can award as a punishment for wrongdoing aside from any actual damages suffered by the plaintiff from any such wrongdoing. Punitive damages are specifically prohibited under the Lanham Act. However, a court may award treble damages, prejudgment interest and costs in cases in which the court deems such an award as just, and as long as the award is not made for punitive reasons. Courts can also award reasonable attorneys’ fees in exceptional cases such as egregious intentional infringement.

Purchaser :

In trademark law, the person who ultimately buys a good or service associated with the use of a particular mark. Although consumer confusion is the test of whether or not a trademark has been infringed, such confusion need not be confusion of purchasers. Likely confusion of nonpurchasers qualifies as infringement as well. An example of nonpurchaser confusion is where a product bearing the infringing mark is likely to be seen by nonpurchasers, such as when it is engraved on the good itself. The actual purchaser may not be confused by the engraving if the packaging or store display may contain disclaimers. Nonetheless, if the nonpurchaser who has not had the benefit of seeing the disclaimer is likely to be confused, there trademark infringement exists.

Comments (0)