3 ms·
And yeah, they would have grounds under dilution too... http://www.inta.org/INTABulletin/Pages/TrademarkDilutionRecentUSCaseLawRejectsRequirementThatMarksMustBe
by phonon 11y ago
And yeah, they would have grounds under dilution too...
http://www.inta.org/INTABulletin/Pages/TrademarkDilutionRecentUSCaseLawRejectsRequirementThatMarksMustBe%E2%80%9CIdentical%E2%80%9Dor%E2%80%9CSubstantiallySimilar%E2%80%9D.aspx http://www.inta.org/INTABulletin/Pages/TrademarkDilutionRece...
Plus some states have their own laws on trademark dilution, which may be even more restrictive.
EDIT: Replying to the below--
" following list of non-exhaustive factors that courts may consider"
You would need a court to actually balance the factors.
- Someone1234 11y agoDilution doesn't apply. Both the original logo and the new logo are designed to recognise the same entity. It fails part V in your article: > (v) Whether the user of the mark or trade name intended to create an association with the famous mark. Since the users of the new mark are only utilising it to point to the original owner of the Trademark, dilution doesn't apply.