Category Archives: What Is This Thing Called Dilution?

43Blog’s first take on this is pretty much right on target, IMHO. Decision 6 Th Cir Mosley

What TTABlog said.

Once Mattel sought to enjoin the “Barbie Girl” song as dilutive, and now they’ve licensed it.

Alexndra Roberts: “New-School Trademark Dilution: Famous Among the Juvenile Consuming Public“: The recently enacted Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 recali- brated the degree of fame necessary to garner protection: the TDRA applies only to a mark “widely recognized by the general consuming public of the Unit- ed States as a designation of source of […]

WSJ: The Scariest Monster of All Sues for Trademark Infringement“: When Christina and Patrick Vitagliano dreamed up their Monster Mini Golf franchises — 18-hole, indoor putting greens straddled by glow-in-the-dark statues of ghouls and gargoyles — they never imagined that a California maker of high-end audio cables would object. But Monster Cable Products Inc., which […]

Hershey’s, owner of REESE’S logo for candy, sues Reese’s Nursery and Landscaping. (‘)(‘) Complaint Reeses Nursery Publish at Scribd or explore others: Court Filings Business & Legal trademark complaint

Discussion of what’s necessary to establish fame and family of marks in World Triathlon Corp v Traditional Medicinals (TTAB Nov 3 08). TTABlog discussion here.

Art Van sells furniture. Truck is pictured above. Hershey protested. Interestingly, this complaint contains, in addition to trade dress claims, a conversion claim. Conversion usually involves defendant maintaining control over a chattel. I’m aware of conversion theories applied to intangible property but usually where a chattel bears a relationship to a property right (such as […]

Still kicking around. The discussion of retroactive application of TDRA and the likelihood of this thing called dilution standard begins on page 5. Background from 2003 Supreme Court case here. Decisions V Secret Moseley D Ct june 08 – Upload a Document to Scribd Read this document on Scribd: Decisions V Secret Moseley D Ct […]

SDNY: On remand, the Charbucks Marks does not dilute Starbuck’s famous mark even under the TDRA. See Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc., Case No. 01 Civ. 5981, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44147 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 2008). Commentary by the Las Vegas Trademark Attorney. Decision SDNY STARBUCKS v CHARBUCKS – Upload a Document to […]