The Inherent Distinctiveness Test Under Trademark Law

Thus, the Federal Circuit will uphold the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s factual findings, unless they are unsupported by substantial evidence. Questions of fact include whether a trademark is descriptive ; whether a trademark is generic ; whether a trademark has been abandoned ; and whether a trademark has acquired inherent distinctiveness . To the contrary, legal conclusions by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board are reviewed by de novo. The overall legal conclusion of a likelihood of confusion is a legal determination that is reviewed de novo. This legal determination is based on underlying factual findings of the Board’s application of some or all of the thirteen factors set forth in In re E.I. DuPont DeNemours & Co., 476 F.2d 1357 (CCPA 1973). These factual findings will be evaluated under a substantial evidence standard of review. Thus, the Federal Circuit will uphold the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s factual findings, unless they are unsupported by substantial evidence. Although the DuPont factors are reviewed for substantial evidence, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s overall determination of likelihood of confusion is reviewed without

Different forms of intellectual property protection have certain limitations on the time period they are in effect. The duration a patented design lasts is for 10 years. Fees are paid to make sure this protection remains. A registered design prevents third parties from utilizing the product for up to 25 years if it is renewed each five year period. Proof must be given that a person has created a design. These could be copies or photographic evidence of the design. The aspects of a design that are forbidden for use by others are the appearance, shape, arrangement and decoration. There are some criteria the design must meet in order for it to be protected. It must be new, not offensive, not contain already protected designs and is not

A brand is utilized by a company to differentiate its products from others in the market. Some techniques for accomplishing this are through the use of distinguishing

The Lanham Act defines the term trademark to include “any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof . . . to identify and distinguish his or her goods . . . and to indicate the source of the goods, even if that source is unknown.” The United States Patent and Trademark Office and the U.S. federal courts have interpreted the definition liberally allowing a breath of nontraditional marks to be registered if it.

“The more similar the marks are, the more likely it is that relevant consumers will confuse their sources.” Kibler v. Hall, 843 F.3d 1068, 1077 (6th Cir. 2016). When comparing two marks, the courts view the marks in their entirety and focus on the marks overall impressions, opposed to dissecting the marks and focusing on their individual features. AutoZone, Inc. v. Tandy Corp., 373 F.3d 786, 798 (6th Cir. 2004). Specifically, the court looks to the mark’s overall impression in the light of what occurs in the marketplace

it is not the purview of trademark law to dictate morality, no matter how appealing or distasteful a mark may be. The purpose of trademark law is to promote fair competition by preventing consumer confusion and deception in the marketplace. The type of consumer protection at the heart of trademark law is one of source quality, not moral quality(Carpenter).

Design influences our lives in an unseen yet valuable way. However, original designs are frequently imitated, the law has developed to prevent this. Is this protection adequate? Or, in part due to EU law, has the protection of designs become so complicated that it is unfit for its purpose. In order to assess this, it is important to assess the methods of protecting designs and the interaction between the UK and EU law. There are two ways in which both UK and EU law protects designs: Through registered design rights and unregistered design rights. It is clear that there are multiple ways of protecting rights. What is left to be seen is if this is superfluous, or an adequately nuanced approach to the complicated matter of design law.

We live in a world surrounded by brands. They are so prominent that people nowadays have an easier time recognizing brands because of their trademarks (commonly known as logos) than types of plants or trees. To the common eye, a trademark may seem simple or even an easy design, but not everyone can design a successful “logo”. There are certain guidelines that need to be followed, but the most basic and important function that a trademark needs, is the ability to speak several languages. At the end of the day, it is a symbol that needs to be able to cross language barriers, not only because it will create a brand consistency but it will give it the power to compete globally. However, a successful logo will always follow

The main differences between the copyright,patent,and trademark law is that according to civil code (980) states that: the author of an original work has total ownership of the created object or record.” this law clearly states that the owner of an original work has total ownership and so no one else can claim the record unless he/she buys it directly from the creator of the song or album,so this applies to copyright because the original owner of a record or any other work for that matter has a protection by the Federal bureau of investigation (FBI) and the central intelligence agency (CIA),with this protection the owner of the work must convince the court that he created the copyrighted work which someone else stole,the federal government

To those who are not familiar with the processes within the fashion industry, this world of style is characterized by a peaceful coexistence between all the stakeholders. To those in the know however, this is far from the truth with the fashion industry. The value of the United Kingdom fashion industry is large contributing to about 20 billion pounds into the country’s economy on an annual basis. To have a better understanding, the contribution made by the fashion industry to the country’s Gross Domestic Product is almost twice that being brought in by car manufacturers which is valued at 10.1 billion so fashion is no doubt a major business and clothing designs one of the core assets. In considering this, it is therefore a surprise that businesses that are operating within this industry within this industry are not given the opportunity to do more to protect the designs that they have. This paper puts forward the assertion that based on the case law of J Choo(Jersey) Limited v Towerstone Limited and Others, the system of intellectual property protection available in United Kingdom law is not fit for use in the fashion industry in its present condition.

Since an increasing number of people focus on brand names instead of product, brands become important elements for customers to choose products (Carroll, 2008). When customers trust the brand, the benefits for the manufactures are generated. In the first place, brands can be used by products as the tool to identify and differentiate themselves from various products. Secondly, brands are helpful for companies to build a competitive advantage (Bick, 2009). Therefore, organisations take more attention to branding.

Michael et Augustin has to depend on the quality of their product in order to get in to the market. Among the bigger players in the market, there’s less differentiation, but since the large players have much more resources comparatively, this situation creates a high entrance barrier for the company. In A Better Way to Map Brand Strategy (2015), Niraj Dawar and Charan K. Bagga talk about the centrality-distinctiveness map (Figure 1). Centrality is the recognition and strength of the brand, whereas distinctiveness is the premium qualities of the brands that are resembled upon the customers. There are four different types of brands according to the article, and they are presented in Figure 1 in a 2x2 matrix: unconventional, aspirational, peripheral, mainstream. For Michael et Augustin, centrality is a long shot target due to the established market. However, distinctiveness can be achievable. Therefore, the company has to pursue a strategy to create an unconventional brand, and then transition into the aspirational part.

Customers can make different judgements as regards a brand. Customers put together imagery and the different brand performance to make the judgement (Lane Keller, 2011).

In recent times, branding has played a pivotal role in some brands’ success. This has been made possible through the ability of some marketers to capture the essence and minds of people (consumers), and put the trends and characteristics into the personality of a brand. Customers have always found ways to identify themselves with certain products, and on several occasions, branding campaigns

Marketing Management, 14e (Kotler/Keller) Chapter 9 Creating Brand Equity 1) The first step in the strategic brand management process is ________. A) measuring consumer brand loyalty B) identifying and establishing brand positioning C) planning and implementing brand marketing D) measuring and interpreting brand performance E) growing and sustaining brand value Answer: B Page Ref: 241 Objective: 1 AACSB: Analytic skills Difficulty: Easy 2) The American Marketing Association defines a ________ as "a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors." A) copyright B) trademark C) slogan D) brand E)