|
Class |
Topics |
Primary Materials |
Reading Assignments |
Slides and Handouts |
|
Class 1 Monday, Jan. 7 |
I. Introduction Foundations of the idea of unfair competition Unfair competition and copyright |
· International News Service v. The Associated Press · Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. |
CB 1-32 (omit CB 26, Note 3; CB 27, Notes 4-5; CB 28, Note 6; CB 29, Note 9) |
|
|
Class 2 Wednesday, Jan. 9 |
The constitutional
basis of federal trademark protection Trademark
policy II. The
“use” requirement The traditional
use requirement |
· In re Trade-Mark Cases · Blue Bell v. Farah Mfg.
·
Zazu Designs v. L’Oreal |
CB 32-62 |
|
|
Class 3 Monday, Jan. 14 |
Analogous use Federal registration and intent-to-use III. The geographic scope of trademark rights The common law approach |
· Maryland Stadium Authority v. Becker · WarnerVision Entertainment v. Empire of Carolina · United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co. |
CB 62-90 (omit CB 76, Note 3) |
|
|
Class 4 Wednesday, Jan. 16 |
Federal registration and geographic scope International use and domestic rights |
· Dawn Donut v. Hart’s Food Stores · Burger King v. Hoots · Person’s Co. v. Christman |
CB 90-121 (omit CB 102, Note 5; CB 119, Note 3) |
|
|
Class 5 Wednesday, Jan. 23 |
Parallel imports IV. Distinctiveness Descriptive marks and the spectrum of distinctiveness |
· K Mart Corp. v. Cartier · Lever Brothers v. U.S. · Zatarains v. Oak Grove Smokehouse |
CB 122-56 |
|
|
Class 6 Monday, Jan. 28 |
Generic words |
· Anti-Monopoly v. General Mills Fun Group · Genesee Brewing Co. v. Stroh Brewing Co. |
CB 156-90 (omit CB 168-72, Notes 4-6) |
|
|
Class 7 Wednesday, Jan. 30 |
Primarily merely a surname Deceptive marks Primarily geographically deceptively misdescriptive marks |
· Peaceable Planet v. Ty, Inc. · In re Budge Mfg. Co. · In re California Innovations, Inc. |
CB 190-212 |
|
|
Class 8 Monday, Feb. 4 |
Objectionable marks Federal registration and presumption of validity |
· Pro-Football v. Harjo · Park ‘N Fly v. Dollar Park and Fly |
CB 212-49 |
|
|
Class 9 Wednesday, Feb. 6 |
V. Protection of trade dress Common law Preemption of state law protection |
· Kellogg v. National Biscuit Co. · Crescent Tool Co. v. Kilborn & Bishop Co. · Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. · Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting |
CB 250-74 (omit CB 268, Note 1) |
|
|
Class 10 Monday, Feb. 11 |
Federal trade dress claims — Distinctiveness |
· Two Pesos v. Taco Cabana · Qualitex v. Jacobson Products |
CB 274-302 (omit CB 287, Note 9; CB 301, Note 4) |
|
|
Class 11 Wednesday, Feb. 13 |
— Functionality |
· Wal-Mart Stores v. Samara Bros. · TrafFix Devices v. Marketing Displays |
CB 302-29 |
|
|
Class 12 Monday, Feb. 18 |
VI. Trademark ownership Initial ownership Assignments Licenses |
· Sengoku Works v. RMC Int’l · Sugar Busters v. Brennan · Barcamerica v. Tyfield Importers |
CB 330-60 (omit CB 351, Note 5) |
|
|
Class 13 Wednesday, Feb. 20 |
Abandonment by nonuse VII. Trademark
infringement Likelihood of confusion |
· Silverman v. CBS · Estee Lauder v. The Gap |
CB 360-389 |
|
|
Class 14 Monday, Feb. 25 |
Promotional goods Post-sale confusion Initial-interest confusion |
· Boston Professional Hockey Ass’n v. Dallas Cap & Emblem · Ferrari S.P.A. v. Roberts · Mobil Oil v. Pegasus Petroleum |
CB 390-416 (omit CB 401, Note 10) |
|
|
Class 15 Wednesday, Feb. 27 |
Reverse confusion Parody |
· A & H Sportswear v. Victoria’s Secret · Anheuser-Busch v. L. & L. Wings · Anheuser-Busch v. Balducci Publications |
CB 416-50 |
|
|
Class 16 Monday, Mar. 4 |
Secondary liability VIII. Dilution Theory of dilution Fame |
· Hard Rock Cafe v. Concession Services · Ty Inc. v. Perryman · Coach Services v. Triumph Learning |
CB 450-62 (omit CB 459, Note 4) CB 476-77 (Note 4 only) CB 478-88 |
|
|
Class 17 Wednesday, Mar. 6 |
Dilution by blurring and tarnishment Parody |
· Starbucks v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee · Visa v. JSL Corp. · V Secret Catalogue v. Moseley · Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Haute Diggity Dog |
Handout:
V Secret Catalogue v. Moseley CB 523-34 |
|
|
Class 18 Monday, Mar. 18 |
IX. Trademark defenses Fair use Descriptive use and nominative use |
· Canal Co. v. Clark · KP Permanent Make-Up v. Lasting Impression · Champion Spark Plug v. Sanders · Smith v. Chanel · New Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing |
CB 536-67 (omit CB 547, Note 4; CB 551, Note 2) |
|
|
Class 19 Wednesday, Mar. 20 |
Laches, estoppel, and acquiescence The First Amendment |
· Conan Properties, Inc. v. Conans Pizza · Kellogg v. Exxon · Mattel v. MCA Records |
CB 567-602 (omit CB 588, Note 5) |
|
|
Class 20 Monday, Mar.
25 |
X. Trademarks on the Internet |
· Brookfield Communications v. West Coast Entertainment |
CB 603-30 CB 670-71 |
|
|
Class 21 Wednesday, Mar. 27 |
Gripe sites |
· Interstellar Starship Services v. Epix · Bosley Medical Institute v. Kremer · Lucas Nursery v. Grosse |
CB 630-62 |
|
|
Class 22 Monday, Apr. 1 |
Search engines Trademark use |
· Playboy v. Netscape · Rosetta Stone v. Google
·
Rescuecom v. Google
·
|
CB 662-86 Handout: Rosetta Stone v. Google (omit CB 672, Note 3; CB 673, Note 5; CB 674, Note 6) |
|
|
Class 23 Wednesday, Apr. 3 |
XI. Remedies Injunctive relief Monetary damages and attorney’s fees |
·
North American Medical v. Axiom · Maltina Corp. v. Cawy Bottling · Texas Pig Stands v. Hard Rock Cafe |
CB 687-714 |
|
|
Class 24 Monday, Apr. 8 |
Reverse confusion Counterfeit goods XII. False and misleading advertising “False or misleading” |
· Sands, Taylor v. Quaker Oats · U.S. v. Torkington · American Home Products v. Johnson and Johnson |
CB 722-53 (omit CB 734, Notes 2 & 3; CB 742, Note 2) |
|
|
Class 25 Wednesday, Apr. 10 |
Materiality and puffery |
· United Industries v. Clorox · Pizza Hut v. Papa John’s |
CB 753-84 |
|
|
Class 26 Monday, Apr. 15 |
Review session |
|
|