|
[back to notice text]
Question: What is the bare minimum of trademark law that I have to understand to decipher this C&D?
Answer: Your opponent should say that your mark is causing consumer confusion or is likely to cause consumer confusion. Or it should mention it's famousness and complain of dilution or tarnishment. (If the C&D does not say this, then no trademark claim may actually exist, and you can rest assured that your opponent is engaging in scare tactics or has hired a highly incompetent attorney). A mark protects more than identical copying, it extends to anything that is confusingly similar, even if it isn't exactly the same. Functioning in a quasi-magical talisman-like capacity, trademarks designate the source or quality of goods or services. For this reason, the law protects against confusion in the market place by ensuring that marks on the same or similar products or services are sufficiently different. The law also protects famous marks against dilution of value and tarnishment of the reputation of the goods or services on which it appears or the source of those products, regardless of any confusion. You can roughly assess the validity of your opponent?s claim of confusion by classifying the marks involved. A trademark can fall into one of 5 categories. It can be: (1) fanciful; (2) arbitrary; (3) suggestive; (4) descriptive; or (5) generic. Not all of these varieties of marks are entitled to the same level, or indeed any level, of trademark protection. A fanciful mark is a mark someone made up; examples include KODAK or H?AGEN-DAZS. An arbitrary mark is a known term applied to a completely unrelated product or service; for instance, AMAZON.com for an online book-store cum one-stop shopping site or APPLE for computers. Fanciful and arbitrary marks are considered strong marks and garner substantial trademark protection. A suggestive mark is one that hints at the product, but which requires an act of imagination to make the connection: COPPERTONE for sun tan lotion or PENGUIN for coolers or refrigerators are examples. Suggestive marks are also strong marks and receive protection. A descriptive mark, predictably, describes the product: HOLIDAY INN describes a vacation hotel and FISH-FRI describes batter for frying fish. Descriptive marks do not receive any trademark protection unless their user has used them in commerce and has built up secondary meaning. "Secondary meaning" occurs when consumers identify the goods or services on which the descriptive term appears with a single source. In other words, if consumers know that HOLIDAY INN hotels are all affiliated with a single source, then the mark has secondary meaning and receives trademark protection. Finally, generic marks simply designate the variety of goods involved: for example, "cola" used on soft drinks and "perfume" on perfume are both generic terms. Generic marks never receive any trademark protection; they are free for everybody to use. (Keep in mind, though, that "Cola" on a nightclub is arbitrary, and therefore receives protection). If your opponent is complaining that you have used the word "bakery" for a bake shop or "car" for a car repair shop, then you can safely guess that the c & d is baseless. On the other hand, if your opponent is concerned about the fact that both of you use of the term "Sweet Pickles" on alpaca sweaters, then the c & d may have some merit. There are a few more wrinkles as well. Some marks are word marks (text only) and others are design marks (images which may or may not include text). Design marks do not provide independent protectin for the text incorporated in the design. So if the mark is only a design mark, it doesn't prevent others from using the text so long as they don't copy the design elements.
[back to notice text]
Question: What civil and criminal liabilities may be imposed for trademark infringement?
Answer: Under federal law (Lanham Act Section 32), an infringer shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for certain remedies provided in the Act. One such remedy is an injunction, where a court orders a person who was found to violate the Act to stop its infringing activities. A trademark owner/registrant may also be able to obtain lost profits or damages against a defendant in a civil action only if the acts were committed with knowledge that such imitation was intended to be used to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive. The trademark owner can recover (1) the domain holder's profits from use of the mark, (2) the trademark owner's damages resulting from harm to the value of mark, and (3) court costs as "actual damages." In determining the award to be paid, the court can choose to award up to three times the amount of actual damages. Instead of having to prove the amount of "actual" damages suffered as above, the mark owner can instead request payment of "statutory damages" from $1000 and $100,000 per domain name. Attorney fees may be awarded in exceptional circumstances, such as when there was a willful and malicious violation. The court can order the cancellation or transfer of a domain registration. In the case of a willful violation of Lanham Act section 43, a court may order that all labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles, and advertisements in the possession of a defendant bearing the registered trademark shall be delivered up and destroyed.
[back to notice text]
Question: Does the product or service on which I am using the mark matter? Do dates matter?
Answer: It matters if the mark is not famous. The C&D should disclose your opponent?s products and/or services and the date on which it commenced use of the allegedly infringed mark. This will help you guesstimate whether a likelihood of confusion between the marks exists. For instance, if your opponent uses ?opera? on truffles and you use "opera" on silk gloves, consumers are not likely to confuse the products. If the mark is determined by a court to be famous, however, confusion is irrelevant and [non-fair] use on any type of goods may be an infringement. The date on which your opponent began using the mark is significant because a junior (later) user cannot displace a senior (first) user in the senior user?s geographic region. In other words, if you have owned a chain of donut shops called "Lucky Donuts," with locations in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut since 1943, a national chain called "Lucky Donuts" founded in 1979 has no trademark infringement claim against you in the NJ-NY-CT tri-state area. If your opponent has begun using its allegedly infringed mark after your use, you have another reason to question the merit of the C&D.
[back to notice text]
Question: What is trade dress?
Answer: Trade Dress is a distinctive, nonfunctional feature, which distinguishes a merchant's or manufacturer's goods or services from those of another. The trade dress of a product involves the "total image" and can include the color of the packaging, the configuration of goods, etc... Even the theme of a restaurant may be considered trade dress. Examples include the packaging for Wonder Bread, the tray configuration for Healthy Choice frozen dinners, and the color scheme of Subway sub shops. Such a broad and ambiguous definition makes trade dress very easy to manipulate. Seeking protection against trade dress infringements can be vital to the survival of a business.
[back to notice text]
Question: What exactly are the rights a trademark owner has?
Answer: In the US, trademark rights come from actual use of the mark to label one's services or products or they come from filing an application with the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that states an intention to use the mark in future commerce. In most foreign countries, trademarks are valid only upon registration. There are two trademark rights: the right to use (or authorize use) and the right to register. The person who establishes priority rights in a mark gains the exclusive right to use it to label or identify their goods or services, and to authorize others to do so. According to the Lanham Act, determining who has priority rights in a mark involves establishing who was the first to use it to identify his/her goods. The PTO determines who has the right to register the mark. Someone who registers a trademark with the intent to use it gains "constructive use" when he/she begins using it, which entitles him/her to nationwide priority in the mark. However, if two users claim ownership of the same mark (or similar marks) at the same time, and neither has registered it, a court must decide who has the right to the mark. The court can issue an injunction (a ruling that requires other people to stop using the mark) or award damages if people other than the owner use the trademark (infringement). Trademark owners do not acquire the exclusive ownership of words. They only obtain the right to use the mark in commerce and to prevent competitors in the same line of goods or services from using a confusingly similar mark. The same word can therefore be trademarked by different producers to label different kinds of goods. Examples are Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets. Owners of famous marks have broader rights to use their marks than do owners of less-well-known marks. They can prevent uses of their marks by others on goods that do not even compete with the famous product.
[back to notice text]
Question: I do not know what these cases or statutes cited in the C&D mean.
Answer: If your opponent has cited cases and statutes in the C&D, do not freak out. The fact that your opponent can include some legal authority in the C&D does not mean that the law is on its side. If you can, go look up the cases and statutes to see what they say. You can go to the nearest law school's law library for help, or you can try a free legal resource web site like Findlaw. Many of them are accessible on the Internet by keyword search using the full case name or it's citation (the numbers and abbreviations that follow the names of the parties). If your opponent is relying on federal law, it will probably cite one or more of the following sections of the Lanham Act:
(1) section 32 (also known as section 1114);
(2) section 43(a) [a/k/a section 1125(a)]; or
(3) section 43(c) [a/k/a section 1125(c)]. (The smaller numbers indicate how the statutory sections were numbered when the law was a bill in Congress; the larger numbers indicate how the statutory sections were re-numbered when the law was codified in the U.S. Code. Under either numbering system, the laws say the same thing). An additional statute, the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) [a/k/a section 1125(d) relates specifically to domain names. Section 32 (codified as 15 U.S.C. 1114) is the basic statute governing trademark infringement of registered marks. If you use a mark in commerce that is confusingly similar to a registered trademark, you may be civilly liable under section 32. This section describes how to determine infringement, what the remedies are, and what defenses are available. Section 43(a) [codified as 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)] is the "false designation of origin" statute. If you use a mark in commerce that is likely to cause confusion or deception as to affiliation, association, origin, or sponsorship with another trademark, you may be civilly liable under section 43(a). Section 43(a) does not require that any of the marks be registered. Section 43(c)[codified as 15 U.S.C. 1125(c)] is the "anti-dilution" provision. This section allows the owner of a famous trademark to prevent use of the mark by junior users whose use ?dilutes? the distinctive quality of the famous trademark. In other words, if someone tries to sell "KODAK pianos," KODAK could stop the person -- even if consumers were not confused -- because KODAK is a famous mark, and its use on products other than film and film-printing accessories (or other products on which Eastman Kodak places the mark) dilutes its uniqueness. The ACPA [codified as 15 USC 1125(d) prohibits "cybersquatting" and lists the elements and defenses to a civil claim against a domain name holder. If you identify the statutory provisions on which your opponent relies, you can begin to get a feel for whether the C&D has merit. For instance, if your opponent relies on section 32, but does not disclose a registration number, your first question is: does your opponent have a registered mark? If not, it has no claim under section 32.
[back to notice text]
Question: What is trademark dilution?
Answer: A type of infringement of a famous trademark in which the defendant's use, while not causing a likelihood of confusion, tarnishes the image or blurs the distintiveness of the plaintiff's mark. For example, if someone tries to sell "KODAK" pianos, KODAK could stop the person--even if consumers were not confused--because "KODAK" is a famous mark, and its use on products other than film and film-printing accessories (or other products on which Eastman Kodak places the mark) dilutes its uniqueness. Many states have anti-dilution laws. The federal government only recently enacted anti-dilution legislation; see the Federal Trademark Dilution Act at 15 USC 1125(c).
[back to notice text]
Question: What does "Secondary Meaning" refer to?
Answer: Many words are commonly used in ordinary language. Can they become trademarks? They can if they acquire special significance in reference to particular goods. For example, "apple" is a common word, but also a trademark for computers and for recordings. The word has acquired "secondary meaning" in each product category because consumers associate it with a particular brand of product. Secondary meaning gives trademark owners protection, but does not prevent people from using the same word for other types of products or in common conversation.
[back to notice text]
Question: How can I find out if someone has a valid trademark?
Answer: It isn't easy. In the United States, a trademark owner isn't required to register the mark anywhere, so there is no single central list of them all. Unlike most other nations, registration here is optional. Many owners do register their marks with the government, however, to better notify the world of their claims. Each state has its own trademark registry for goods and services sold locally. For companies that sell in more than one state, there is a US federal registry that is accessible online through TESS. TESS is searchable by key word as well as by registration number. Because registration is not required, however, a word might still be a protected mark even if it doesn't appear in any of these locations. When a company is selecting a new brand, its trademark attorney will usually conduct a "trademark availability" search which will look in many different locations to try and ferret out competing uses of the desired name. Business directories, Internet search engines, telephone directories are other searched sources. Multi-national vendors will search trademark registries in foreign nations as well. Even the most exhaustive search will not be conclusive, however, but it will usually indicate that if there is any other commercial use, it is probably limited to a very local area. It is OK to use the same mark as another company, so long as the new use isn't likely to confuse consumers.
[back to notice text]
Question: What is false designation of origin?
Answer: It covers similar ground to trademark infringement, but is more specific to misrepresentation of source, and applies even when there is no trademark at issue. If your website makes it appear that you sell products made by Company X, but in fact you make these products in your garage, Company X might accuse you of falsely designating the origin of (or "passing off") your items.
[back to notice text]
Question: What is unfair competition?
Answer: "Unfair competition" covers a wide range of kinds of unjust business behavior---so many kinds, in fact, that it is impossible to give one simple general definition. In essence, unfair competition means trademark infringement or false advertising to confuse the public. In most states, only commercial competitors can be engaged in "unfair competition."
[back to notice text]
Question: What is this laundry list of things the C&D says will happen if I don't obey?
Answer: Your opponent may describe a parade of horribles to demonstrate with exquisite detail what it will do to you unless you capitulate. This list generally includes, but is not limited to:
(1) ceasing use of the allegedly infringing mark or surrendering the domain name;
(2) rendering an accounting;
(3) posting corrective advertising;
(4) obtaining an injunction;
(5) recovering costs and fees. Though these things sound awful, they are not medieval tortures (although that may be a function of the fact that Torquemada never thought of them). Ceasing use of the mark is self-explanatory: your opponent wants you to stop using the mark. Your opponent might also ask you to surrender your domain name if they believe the domain name causes (or is likely to cause) confusion with their trademark. For example, under ICANN rules (the UDRP), you may have to surrender your domain name if the following three conditions are satisfied:
(1) your domain name is identical or confusingly similar to your opponent?s;
(2) you have no legitimate right or interest in the name (in other words, you are not using the name to conduct a bona fide business or for non-commercial fair use purposes); and
(3) your name is registered and used in bad faith. An accounting basically means that you disclose the following information to your opponent:
(1) the date you began using the allegedly infringing mark;
(2) the names of individuals who knew of the use when it began;
(3) the amount of traffic at your web site or business at your store; and
(4) your profits and revenues during the time you used the allegedly infringing mark. Corrective advertising means you give notice to the public that you were using a mark confusingly similar to your opponent?s, and that you are not affiliated with your opponent. An injunction is a judicial order to do something. An injunction can prevent you from using the allegedly infringing trademark. Some provisions of the Lanham Act permit a trademark holder to recover attorney?s fees and court costs from an infringer. That your opponent has listed these various remedies does not mean that it is entitled to them; do not confuse the smorgasbord of legal options with your opponent?s right to inflict any of them on you.
[back to notice text]
Question: What defenses are there to trademark infringement or dilution?
Answer:
Defendants in a trademark infringement or dilution claim can assert
basically two types of affirmative defense: fair use or parody.
Fair use occurs when a descriptive mark is used in
good faith for its primary, rather than secondary (trademark),
meaning, and no consumer confusion is likely to result. So, for
example, a cereal manufacturer may be able to describe its cereal as
consisting of "all bran," without infringing upon Kelloggs' rights in
the mark "All Bran." Such a use is purely descriptive, and does not
invoke the secondary meaning of the mark. Similarly, in one case, a
court held that the defendant's use of "fish fry" to describe a batter
coating for fish was fair use and did not infringe upon the plaintiff's
mark "Fish-Fri." Zatarain's, Inc. v. Oak
Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1983). Such uses are
privileged because they use the terms only in their purely descriptive
sense.
Some courts have recognized a somewhat different, but closely-related,
fair-use defense, called nominative use. Nominative use occurs when use
of a term is necessary for purposes of identifying another producer's
product, not the user's own product. For example, in a recent case, the
newspaper USA Today ran a telephone poll, asking its readers to vote for
their favorite member of the music group New Kids on the Block. The New
Kids on the Block sued USA Today for trademark infringement. The court
held that the use of the trademark "New Kids on the Block" was a
privileged nominative use because: (1) the group was not readily
identifiable without using the mark; (2) USA Today used only so much of
the mark as reasonably necessary to identify it; and (3) there was no
suggestion of endorsement or sponsorship by the group. The basic idea
is that use of a trademark is sometimes necessary to identify and talk
about another party's products and services. When the above conditions
are met, such a use will be privileged. New Kids on the Block v. News America
Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992).
Finally, certain parodies of or using trademarks may be permissible if they are not too directly tied to commercial use. The basic idea here is that
artistic and editorial parodies of trademarks serve a valuable critical
function, and that this critical function is entitled to some degree of
First Amendment protection. The courts have adopted different ways of
incorporating such First Amendment interests into the analysis. For
example, some courts have applied the general "likelihood of confusion"
analysis, using the First Amendment as a factor in the analysis. Other
courts have expressly balanced First Amendment considerations against
the degree of likely confusion. Still other courts have held that the
First Amendment effectively trumps trademark law, under certain
circumstances. In general, however, the courts appear to be more
sympathetic to the extent that parodies are less commercial, and less
sympathetic to the extent that parodies involve commercial use of the
mark.
So, for example, a risqu? parody of an L.L. Bean magazine advertisement (L.L. Beam's "Back to School Sex Catalog") was found not to constitute infringement. L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811
F.2d 26, 28 (1st Cir. 1987). Similarly, the use of a pig-like
character named "Spa'am" in a Muppet movie was found not to violate
Hormel's rights in the trademark "Spam." Hormel Foods Corp. v. Jim Henson Prods., 73
F.3d 497 (2d Cir. 1996). On the other hand, "Gucchie Goo" diaper
bags were found not to be protected under the parody defense, Gucci Shops, Inc. v. R.H. Macy & Co., 446 F.
Supp. 838 (S.D.N.Y. 1977). Similarly, posters bearing the logo
"Enjoy Cocaine" were found to violate the rights of Coca-Cola in the
slogan "Enjoy Coca-Cola", Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183 (E.D.N.Y. 1972). In short -- although the courts recognize a parody defense, the precise contours of that defense are difficult to outline with any precision.
[back to notice text]
Question: What does the "reservation of rights" language mean? What are they "waiving" at me?
Answer: Many C&Ds will say something like, "This letter shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any rights or remedies, which are expressly reserved." This is just legalese for saying, "Even if you do what we ask in this letter, we can still sue you later." The language is standard; do not be alarmed. Litigation is extremely unpleasant, and unless your opponent is irrational (always a distinct possibility, of course), it will not bring litigation after it has obtained what it wants.
| 
FAQ: Questions