Dilution legislation gains momentum but raises some concerns; a federal law might impair First Amendment rights
Article Abstract:
Lobbying for a federal dilution law has come from the ABA's Intellectual Property Section as well as other quarters. State dilution laws form a patchwork, existing in about 50% of states, and few courts have spoken on the precise interpretation of state dilution law. Proposals to add a new Section 43(c) covering dilution to the Lanham Act have previously failed in Congress, but the push for federal coverage of dilution continues. The Model State Trademark Bill would make laws more uniform at the state level. Opponents fear such a law would impinge on the right to freedom of speech.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Dilution Act may limit commercial parodies; ads poking fun at another's famous mark may no longer be allowed under the new law
Article Abstract:
Owners of famous trademarks have in the Trademark Dilution Act a way to stop product parodies which the Lanham Act may have permitted. The commercial demarcation of the act is much broader than the fair use doctrine of the copyright law. The act's focus on commercial use is, however, problematic. Considering the free speech interests which are a part of parody involve this device's expressive rather than its commercial nature. The distinction between commercial and noncommercial uses may be a difficult one to draw.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
H.R. 1295, which is intended to create a new cause of action for the dilution of 'famous' marks, may be construed as granting owners rights that are overbroad
Article Abstract:
Legislation now in the House of Representatives to amend the Lanham Act will sow confusion because it inadequately defines 'famous' and gives little guidance for actual use. HR 1295 would create a federal version of the protection for famous marks now offered explicitly by 27 states and through the common law by others. However, the bill does not limit applicability to truly and nationally famous marks, and its definition is circular. It might be ineffective, but it could also drastically change trademark law.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Some comments on the discount valuation of publicly traded stock for federal estate, gift, and income tax purposes
- Abstracts: HMO legislation is aimed at protecting patients; consumers and providers call for regulation; the managed care industry would disagree
- Abstracts: Re-tailoring jury trial rights: dry-cleaning patent case raises larger Seventh Amendment issues. O.J. trial a case study in stress: experts point to ways of coping when courtrooms heat up, tempers flare
- Abstracts: A procurement-related rationale is needed to sustain Clinton's executive order prohibiting federal contractors from permanently replacing striking workers
- Abstracts: Retirement planning: more than investment education. The re-emergence of real estate as an important investment asset