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 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 introduces the rules governing trademark assignments and licenses under common law and the Lanham Act. It may be used either as review or as the initial introduction to the topic.
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 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.
Likelihood of confusion is a core concept in trademark law. This lesson is designed to teach the basics of confusion, as well as some more advanced aspects of the topic. It requires students to work through the multifactor analysis used by courts with specific problems. It also includes a discussion of the different forms of confusion.
This lesson covers the fair use and related "nominative" fair use defenses to claims of trademark infringement. It assumes basic familiarity with trademark policy, the "generic to fanciful" spectrum of distinctiveness trademark classification system, and the likelihood of confusion test for infringement. It can be used (1) as a stand-alone introduction, (2) as a supplement when time restrictions limit in-class coverage, or (3) to reinforce points made during class.
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.
The purpose of this lesson is to supplement your study of money damage recoveries permitted by The Lanham Act. Damage awards for trademark infringement may receive coverage in either your Remedies course or in your Trademark or Intellectual Property courses. This lesson will serve to introduce, review, and refine the principles you have studied in these respective courses to assist you in determining when damage awards for trademark infringement will be allowed.
This lesson covers the types of marks that are deemed eligible for protection under federal and state dilution laws. Although the focus is on eligibility under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act (Lanham Act section 43(c)), there is coverage of the different types of state dilution statutes -- those based on the earlier (1964) Model State Trademark Bill (such as Massachusetts), and those based on the federal statute.
This lesson reviews the various defenses to and remedies for dilution available under federal and state law. It can be used either to learn the material for the first time, or to review material already learned in class. The lesson assumes familiarity with several trademark concepts, including dilution (and the prerequisites for dilution protection) and fair use.
This lesson covers the "cybersquatting" provisions of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. sec. 1125(d), which grant a cause of action to trademark owners against persons who, with a bad faith intent to profit, register, traffic in, or use domain names that infringe the rights of those trademark owners.