This article does what any good article regarding an area of law should do...leaves the reader walking away with more questions than answers, and this is probab

This article does what any good article regarding an area of law should do...leaves the reader walking away with more questions than answers, and this is probably doubly applicable to trademark and IP law. In fact, anytime you consult with an IP lawyer and their answer is anything more/less than maybe that should raise a red flag. In short: 1. A registered TM is prima facia evidence of an enforceable TM and ownership; 2. The legal standard for violation of the TM is likelihood of confusion by the consumer (i.e. people are buying Fony intending to buy Sony). The article mentions certain issues such as category/class of goods, but notes even that is not determinative of actual infringement. Also, mentions the concept of dilution of TM (the infringer is hawking a substandard product), but this is not a requirement of the analysis, the infringing product could be superior and still infringe the TM rights. 3. At the end of the day the legal standard of infringement is very subjective, and while not directly mentioned, it is not only possible but occurs regularly where different Courts will arrive at different conclusions as to whether there is TM infringement. The one thing I disagree with is the claim this is an unsettled area of law, certainly it is more subjective than I like in my legal standard, but it is not unsettled.