Add to ORKGThis comment asserts that federal courts do not decide the likelihood of confusion issue by using these theories. Instead, the typical likelihood of confusion dispute is decided by giving actual confusion more weight than other analytical elements, despite courts\u27 claims that they give the elements equal weight and consideration
The Federal Trademark Dilution Act ( FTDA ) has failed to protect, in the manner intended by Congres...
This comment addresses the concept of initial interest confusion in trade dress law and examines sev...
This comment will focus on the way in which courts in the United States and the European Union have ...
This comment asserts that federal courts do not decide the likelihood of confusion issue by using th...
This article seeks to provide an overall discussion of the role of actual confusion evidence in fede...
The U.S. circuit courts disagree on whether the likelihood of confusion determination in trademark l...
A stark circuit split mars the consistency of trademark infringement analyses within U.S. Circuit Co...
The likelihood of confusion standard defines the scope of trademark infringement. Likelihood of conf...
The primary objective of this Article is to illustrate the tendency of judges to inappropriately rel...
Trademark law is in the midst of an identity crisis. The prevailing economic account of the law has ...
In KP Permanent Make-up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., the United States Supreme Court ruled t...
The typical shorthand justification for trademark rights centers on avoiding consumer confusion. But...
Trademark tacking allows a mark owner to adjust her mark without losing protection. The test for det...
This Comment contains six main parts. Part II analyzes the Lanham Act of 19461 and the likelihood of...
This Note will examine the Lanham Act and the ways in which courts have interpreted it, particularly...
The Federal Trademark Dilution Act ( FTDA ) has failed to protect, in the manner intended by Congres...
This comment addresses the concept of initial interest confusion in trade dress law and examines sev...
This comment will focus on the way in which courts in the United States and the European Union have ...
This comment asserts that federal courts do not decide the likelihood of confusion issue by using th...
This article seeks to provide an overall discussion of the role of actual confusion evidence in fede...
The U.S. circuit courts disagree on whether the likelihood of confusion determination in trademark l...
A stark circuit split mars the consistency of trademark infringement analyses within U.S. Circuit Co...
The likelihood of confusion standard defines the scope of trademark infringement. Likelihood of conf...
The primary objective of this Article is to illustrate the tendency of judges to inappropriately rel...
Trademark law is in the midst of an identity crisis. The prevailing economic account of the law has ...
In KP Permanent Make-up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., the United States Supreme Court ruled t...
The typical shorthand justification for trademark rights centers on avoiding consumer confusion. But...
Trademark tacking allows a mark owner to adjust her mark without losing protection. The test for det...
This Comment contains six main parts. Part II analyzes the Lanham Act of 19461 and the likelihood of...
This Note will examine the Lanham Act and the ways in which courts have interpreted it, particularly...
The Federal Trademark Dilution Act ( FTDA ) has failed to protect, in the manner intended by Congres...
This comment addresses the concept of initial interest confusion in trade dress law and examines sev...
This comment will focus on the way in which courts in the United States and the European Union have ...