|
Authored by: mrisch on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 02:10 PM EDT |
Sorry, but that's just not right under the law. A famous
mark need not be unique or made up. It need only have
general recognition. No trademark lawyer would argue that
Apple's logo is not famous.
From Lanham Act 43(c)(1):
In determining whether a mark is distinctive and famous, a
court may consider factors such as, but not limited to--
(A) the degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of
the mark;
(B) the duration and extent of use of the mark in connection
with the goods or services with which the mark is used;
(C) the duration and extent of advertising and publicity of
the mark;
(D) the geographical extent of the trading area in which the
mark is used;
(E) the channels of trade for the goods or services with
which the mark is used;
(F) the degree of recognition of the mark in the trading
areas and channels of trade used by the marks' owner and the
person against whom the injunction is sought;
(G) the nature and extent of use of the same or similar
marks by third parties; and
(H) whether the mark was registered under the Act of March
3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the
principal register.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 05:49 PM EDT |
Actually, Google came from a mispelling of googol, a number
equal to 10^100. It didn't come entirely from nothing.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|