Here's a good summary of trademark-infringement analysis in the U.S., from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm#7 http://cyber.law.harva

Here's a good summary of trademark-infringement analysis in the U.S., from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm#7 http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm...: -snip- In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark [DCT note: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_distinctiveness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_distinctiveness]; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; [DCT note: Proof of actual confusion is not required, but can be powerful evidence of a likelihood of confusion] (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser [DCT note: Confusion is more likely for an impulse purchase than one in which the buyer pays careful attention to what s/he's getting]; (7) the defendant's intent. [DCT note: Willful copying of another's mark is often taken as circumstantial evidence that consumer confusion is indeed likely, otherwise presumably the copier wouldn't have bothered.] -snip-