Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
§§ 32 and 43 of the Act (now known as 15 U.S.C. §§ 1124–1125) set out the remedies that can be sought when a trademark is infringed. Notably, Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act focuses on false advertising and unfair competition, providing a legal recourse for individuals and businesses. [ 10 ]
The Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d),(passed as part of Pub. L. 106–113 (text)) is a U.S. law enacted in 1999 that established a cause of action for registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name confusingly similar to, or dilutive of, a trademark or personal name.
An unregistered trademark may receive protection under the federal "Lanham Act" (15 USC § 1125), which includes prohibition against commercial misrepresentation of source or origins of goods. Unlike other trademark statutory provisions, a claim under the Lanham Act may permit a party to recover attorneys' fees and costs.
[1] In U.S. law, false designation of origin is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1125. References This page was last edited on 4 December 2021, at 21:18 (UTC). Text is ...
Title 15 of the United States Code outlines the role of commerce and trade in the United States Code. [1] Notable legislation in the title includes the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Consumer Product Safety Act, and the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. 15 U.S.C ...
The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–98 (text)) is a United States federal law which protects famous trademarks from uses that dilute their distinctiveness, even in the absence of any likelihood of confusion or competition.
1-800 CONTACTS v. WhenU.com was a legal dispute beginning in 2002 over pop-up advertisements. [1] It was brought by 1-800 Contacts, an online distributor of various brands of contact lenses against WhenU SaveNow, a maker of advertising software. The suit also named Vision Direct, one of WhenU advertising customers, as a co-defendant. 1-800 ...
The court concluded that, pending the outcome of a jury trial, Google AdWords may be in violation of trademark law (see federal Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)) because it (1) allowed arbitrary advertisers to key their ads (see keyword advertising) to American Blind's trademarks and (2) may confuse search-engine users initially interested in ...