Trademark

This lesson deals with how trademark protection may be lost by abandonment, i.e. the discontinued use of a mark, the licensing of a mark in gross or an assignment of a mark in gross. This lesson is intended to be used as a supplement to the student's course material. It analyzes several issues that arise from the non-use or limited use of a mark, the licensing or assignment of a mark, as well as the considerations that follow the resumption of use of an abandoned mark.

This lesson builds on the concepts that you may have been introduced to in Professor Robert Lind's lesson on the classification of marks, e.g., generic marks, descriptive marks, suggestive marks, arbitrary marks, and fanciful marks. Specifically, this lesson will concentrate on the validity of a mark for trademark protection purposes when the trademark or trade dress is not inherently distinctive.

This lesson explores the Lanham Act provisions governing federal registration of collective marks and certification marks.

This lesson provides an analysis of the levels of distinctiveness and the requirements for the determination of whether a term chosen as a mark is inherently distinctive, must yet acquire distinctiveness, or is incapable of trademark protection regardless of distinctiveness. The lesson is intended as a review of material that is covered early in a Trademark Law course.

This lesson gives an overview of the basics of the European Union's trademark system. The emphasis is on issues of registration and infringement. It often uses a comparative approach, with the U.S. system as a foil. It takes users through both the national systems (via the Trademark Harmonization Directive) and the Community Trademark system. Familiarity with U.S. trademark law is assumed.

This lesson explores section 2 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052, which prohibits certain types of trademarks from being registered on the Principal Register of the PTO, regardless of whether those marks are protectible under state law or under section 43 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125.

This lesson explores how trademark law deals with two specific categories of marks: foreign (non-English) words and people's names. It addresses their ability to function as marks as well as how they should be assessed when determining infringement. The lesson assumes a working familiarity with the "distinctiveness" requirement, the fair use doctrine, and the likelihood of confusion test for infringement.

This lesson offers an introduction to the doctrine of functionality, which operates as a defense prohibiting anyone from claiming an exclusive right in functional shapes, elements, or aspects of a product or product packaging. The protectability or registrability of a trademark depends on a factual determination of a design's functionality. The functionality doctrine attempts to weigh the public and private interest in copying design features against a trademark owner's inherently anticompetitive objective to avoid consumer confusion.

This program takes the student through the basics of a particular area of trademark law — the geographic scope of trademark protection. It includes the general common law principles as enunciated in early Supreme Court cases (Hanover, Rectanus) as well as zone of natural expansion. The program also contains complete coverage of Lanham Act principles including constructive notice, constructive use, section 33 and the limited area defense, concurrent use, and the need for confusion (Dawn Donut).

This lesson teaches about the concept of incontestability: what it is, and what benefits it confers on trademark owners. This lesson can be used either for teaching the subject or for review.

This lesson concerns the initial ownership of trademarks. It does not address the assignment or licensing of trademarks, nor the transfer of trademark registrations. This lesson is intended as a review of material covered in the trademark law course.

This lesson introduces you to the rules governing the award of injunctive relief in actions for trademark infringement. In trademark infringement cases, the harm or loss suffered by a plaintiff is often difficult to prove because of the lack of evidence of a causal connection between the harm and the defendant's wrongful conduct. To account for this evidentiary shortfall, the judicial preference in awarding relief in trademark infringement cases is injunctive relief. Despite this judicial preference, monetary remedies remain available for trademark infringement.