Trademark Dilution Law Changes Not Good for Defendants

Eric Goldman , assistant professor at Santa Clara University School of Law and a frequent blogger, sums up recent changes to trademark dilution laws in the U.S. by saying the bottom line is that the amendments are unfavorable for defendants in trademark dilution cases.

He believes defendants would benefit from a change requiring that the mark in a dilution case must be widely recognized in the United States, making the cause of action unavailable for marks known only within a smaller community. But that benefit is more than offset by a change permitting a plaintiff to only show a likelihood of dilution rather than having to show actual dilution.

Read our previous post for a discussion of the differences between dilution and infringement

Posted on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 at 01:05PM by

T.R. Franklin in Intellectual Property, Internet, Media, Tech |

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

Post a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »

Author:

Author Email (optional):

Author URL (optional):

Post:

↓ | ↑

All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.

Copyright © Euclid Managers. All rights reserved.
What the lawyer makes us say: You have heard it before, but it is important, so here it is again. An insurance policy is the controlling document, and nothing in this blog changes or waives any policy language. You must refer to actual policy language, whether it belongs to us or someone else. Do not rely on a general discussion of policy terms and issues. Actual application of an insurance policy to a particular situation depends on specific facts and applicable law. This blog is not a substitute for legal advice, and an attorney in the appropriate jurisdiction should be consulted for help whenever legal counseling is needed or appropriate.