enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Lanham Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act

    The Lanham (Trademark) Act (Pub. L. 79–489, 60 Stat. 427, enacted July 5, 1946, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. (15 U.S.C. ch. 22) is the primary federal statute governing trademark law in the United States.

  3. List of United States Supreme Court trademark case law

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    The Lanham Act prohibits both "passing off" (misrepresenting one's own goods or services as someone else's) and "reverse passing off" (misrepresenting someone else's goods as one's own); "false designation of origin" in the Lanham Act only refers to the producer of the tangible good, and not the person or entity who conceived the ideas ...

  4. United States trademark law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_trademark_law

    A word, phrase, or logo can act as a trademark. But so can a slogan, a name, a scent, the shape of a product's container, and a series of musical notes. [7] The language of the Lanham Act describes that universe [of things that can qualify as a trademark] in the broadest of terms. It says that trademarks "includ[e] any word, name, symbol, or ...

  5. Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inwood_Laboratories,_Inc...

    Lanham Act Inwood Laboratories Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. , 456 U.S. 844 (1982), is a United States Supreme Court case, in which the Court confirmed the application of and set out a test for contributory trademark liability under § 32 of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1114).

  6. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romag_Fasteners,_Inc._v...

    Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case related to trademark law under the Lanham Act.In the 9–0 decision on judgement, the Court ruled that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement lawsuit is not required to demonstrate that the defendant willfully infringed on their trademark to claim lost profit damages.

  7. POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POM_Wonderful_LLC_v._Coca...

    In 1946, Congress enacted the Lanham Act in order to govern the use of trademarks.Among its stated aims was the regulation of "commerce within the control of Congress by making actionable the deceptive and misleading use of marks in such commerce," [5] and provision was made for civil enforcement actions to be available for private parties in the federal courts.

  8. Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Pesos,_Inc._v._Taco...

    The Lanham Act prohibits "the deceptive and misleading use of marks" to protect business owners "against unfair competition." [4] The Act defines trademarks as "any word, name, symbol, or device or any combination thereof" used by any person "to identify and distinguish his or her goods, including a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the source of the ...

  9. Vidal v. Elster - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidal_v._Elster

    Vidal v. Elster, 602 U.S. 286, is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with 15 U.S.C. § 1052, a provision of the Lanham Act regarding trademarks using the name of living individuals without their consent.