decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The Consummate Demonstration of Famous!!! | 188 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The Consummate Demonstration of Famous!!!
Authored by: mrisch on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 02:10 PM EDT
Sorry, but that's just not right under the law. A famous
mark need not be unique or made up. It need only have
general recognition. No trademark lawyer would argue that
Apple's logo is not famous.

From Lanham Act 43(c)(1):
In determining whether a mark is distinctive and famous, a
court may consider factors such as, but not limited to--
(A) the degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of
the mark;
(B) the duration and extent of use of the mark in connection
with the goods or services with which the mark is used;
(C) the duration and extent of advertising and publicity of
the mark;
(D) the geographical extent of the trading area in which the
mark is used;
(E) the channels of trade for the goods or services with
which the mark is used;
(F) the degree of recognition of the mark in the trading
areas and channels of trade used by the marks' owner and the
person against whom the injunction is sought;
(G) the nature and extent of use of the same or similar
marks by third parties; and
(H) whether the mark was registered under the Act of March
3, 1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the
principal register.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Consummate Demonstration of Famous!!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 05:49 PM EDT
Actually, Google came from a mispelling of googol, a number
equal to 10^100. It didn't come entirely from nothing.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )