Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
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.
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 ...
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).
Argument: Oral argument: Case history; Prior: 697 F.3d 387 (6th Cir. 2012); cert. granted, 569 U.S. 1017 (2013).: Holding; Judgment AFFIRMED. Static Control's alleged injuries—lost sales and damage to its business reputation—fall within the zone of interests protected by the Lanham Act, and Static Control sufficiently alleged that its injuries were proximately caused by Lexmark's ...
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.
The TTAB has interpreted the Lanham Act to give broad standing to parties who claim they may be injured by a mark. Examples of trademarks that were refused or cancelled for disparagement include a depiction of Buddha for beachwear, use of the name of a Muslim group that forbids smoking as a cigarette brand name, and an image consisting of a large "X" over the hammer and sickle national symbol ...
Taubman Co. v. Webfeats, 319 F.3d 770, 778 (6th Cir. 2003) was a United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit case concerning trademark infringement under the Lanham Act due to the unauthorized use of a domain name and website.