Post on 22-Dec-2015
Trademark and Unfair Comp.
Boston College Law School
February 6, 2008
Intent to Use
Bases for Registration
• Lanham Act §1 (15 U.S.C. 1051):– (a) (1) The owner of a trademark used in
commerce may request registration ...– (b)
• (1) A person who has a bona fide intention … to use a trademark in commerce may apply to register the trademark …
• (3) … no mark shall be registered until the applicant has met the requirements for subsection[] … (d) of this section.
Intent to Use
• Lanham Act §1 (15 U.S.C. 1051):– (d) (1) Within six months after the date on
which the notice of allowance … is issued … , the applicant shall file … a verified statement that the mark is in use in commerce …
Intent to Use Procedure
ITU Application Filed Initial PTO Review
PTO Publishes
Notice of Allowance
30-Day Period for Opposition
Statement of Use Filed
6-Month Period (Extendable)
Second PTO Review
Trademark Registered
Actual Use in Commerce
Lanham Act
• Lanham Act §7(c) (15 U.S.C. 1057(c)):– Contingent on the registration of a mark …,
the filing of the application … shall constitute constructive use of the mark, conferring a right of priority, nationwide in effect
WarnerVision v. Empire
Sep. 23, 1994: TLV Files ITU App. For REAL WHEELS
Empire WarnerVision
Actual Use of REAL WHEELS
Notice of Allowance
Statement of Use Filed
6-Month Period (Extendable)
Second PTO Review
Trademark Registered
Actual Use in Commerce
Jan. 3, 1995: Files Use App. For REAL WHEELS
Sues to Enjoin Empire from Using Term
Eastman Kodak v. B&H
Oct. 12, 1990: Files ITU App.For 6200, 6800, 8100
Kodak Opposes: Descriptive
B&H Kodak
Notice of Allowance
Statement of Use Filed
6-Month Period (Extendable)
Second PTO Review
Trademark Registered
Actual Use in Commerce
Initial PTO Review
PTO Publishes
Advantages of Registration
• Nationwide constructive use - priority
• Nationwide constructive notice
• Possibility of achieving incontestability
• Presumption of validity at trial
• Right to sue in federal court
• Availability of extra remedies (e.g. attorney fees, treble damages, border exclusion …)
Registration Process
• Clearing the trademark
• Start use or have bona fide intent to use
• File application
• Examination by PTO
• Publication in Official Gazette
• Registration– Or if intent to use, notice of allowance and later
filing of statement of use; then registration
Additional Issues
• Principal v. Supplemental Register
• Foreign registrations
• Trademark registration maintenance
Bars to Registration
• Lanham Act §2: – (a) Immoral, scandalous, deceptive; disparages
– (b) Flag, coat of arms, insignia of U.S., state, etc.
– (c) Name, portrait, signature of living individual
– (d) Likely to cause confusion with other mark
– (e) Consists of mark that is:• (1) merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive
• (2) primarily geographically descriptive
• (3) primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive
• (4) primarily a surname
• (5) functional
Bars - Immoral, Scandalous
• Lanham Act §2:– Shall register mark unless it:
• “(a) Consists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter, or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute”
In re Bad Frog Brewery
Scandalous or Immoral?
• Yes– MADDONA (wine)
– MESSIAS (wine)
– BUBBY TRAP (bras)
– BULLSHIT (briefcase)
– Picture of defecating dog (t-shirts)
• No– BUDDA (beachwear)
– BIG PECKER (t-shirt)
– WEEK-END SEX (magazine)
– BLACK TAIL (adult magazine)
Harjo v. Pro-Football, Inc.
Other Examples
Bars to Registration
• Lanham Act §2: – (a) Immoral, scandalous, deceptive; disparages
– (b) Flag, coat of arms, insignia of U.S., state, etc.
– (c) Name, portrait, signature of living individual
– (d) Likely to cause confusion with other mark
– (e) Consists of mark that is:• (1) merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive
• (2) primarily geographically descriptive
• (3) primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive
• (4) primarily a surname
• (5) functional
Bars - Flags, Individuals
• Lanham Act §2:– Shall register mark unless it:
• “(b) Consists of or comprises the flag or coat of arms or other insignia of the United States, or of any State or municipality, or of any foreign nation …
• “(c) Consists of or comprises a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent …”
Bars - Likely to Cause Confusion
• Lanham Act §2:– Shall register mark unless it:
• “(d) consists of or comprises a mark which so resembles a mark registered … or a mark or trade name previously used in the United States by another and not abandoned, as to be likely … to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive.”
Bars to Registration
• Lanham Act §2: – (a) Immoral, scandalous, deceptive; disparages
– (b) Flag, coat of arms, insignia of U.S., state, etc.
– (c) Name, portrait, signature of living individual
– (d) Likely to cause confusion with other mark
– (e) Consists of mark that is:• (1) merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive
• (2) primarily geographically descriptive
• (3) primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive
• (4) primarily a surname
• (5) functional
Bars to Registration
• Lanham Act §2:– (f) Except as expressly excluded in subsections (a), (b),
(c), (d), (e)(3), and (e)(5) of this section, nothing herein shall prevent the registration of a mark used by the applicant which has become distinctive of the applicant’s goods in commerce. The Director may accept as prima facie evidence that the mark has become distinctive … upon proof of substantially exclusive and continuous use thereof as a mark by the applicant in commerce for the five years before the date on which the claim of distinctiveness is made ….
Lanham Act §2(e)
• Descriptive– “ORGANIC” for organically
grown oranges
• Deceptive– “ORGANIC” for non-organic
oranges
• Deceptively misdescriptive– “JOE’S FAVORITE” for
oranges that aren’t Joe’s favorite
• Nondeceptively misdescriptive (arbitrary)– “ATOMIC” for oranges
• Geographically descriptive– “FLORIDA” for Florida oranges
• Geographically deceptive– “FLORIDA” for Georgia
oranges
• Geographically deceptively misdescriptive
– “FLORIDA” for auto parts from New Jersey
• Geographically nondeceptively misdescriptive (arbitrary)
– “ANTARCTIC” for Georgia oranges
Examples, Redux
Geographic
DescriptiveFlorida
(Florida Oranges)
Misdescriptive
NondeceptivelyAntarctic
(Florida Oranges)
DeceptivelyFlorida
(Georgia Oranges)(NJ Auto Parts)
§2(e)(2) - Can register if Secondary Meaning
§2(e)(3) - Cannot register
Arbitrary or suggestive - Can register
Examples
• ARIZONA (ice tea, not made in Arizona)
• NANTUCKET (fruit drinks made in Nantucket)
• CORNING (glassware products made in Corning, NY)
• HERSHEY (chocolate made in Hershey, PA and elsewhere)
• PARK AVENUE (luxury car, not made on Park Avenue)
• SWISS ARMY KNIFE (pocket knife, not made in Switz.)
Bars to Registration
• Lanham Act §2: – (a) Immoral, scandalous, deceptive; disparages
– (b) Flag, coat of arms, insignia of U.S., state, etc.
– (c) Name, portrait, signature of living individual
– (d) Likely to cause confusion with other mark
– (e) Consists of mark that is:• (1) merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive
• (2) primarily geographically descriptive
• (3) primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive
• (4) primarily a surname
• (5) functional
Administrative Details
• Next Assignment– V.A – Genericity– V.B – Abandonment