People who don't believe they would ever steal a car or rob a bank, don't think twice about lifting an artist's work or a conglomerate's logo in order to use it for a purpose of their own. They take music, artwork, photos, and logos without thinking anything about it. It most cases, this is against the law. It may be copyright infringement, and, in cases of famous brands, it may be considered trademark dilution and result in significant penalties.
Some brands are so well known that their logos are immediately recognizable and associated with nothing but them. Corporations spend millions of dollars creating and maintaining their brand identity. Not only is the logo associated with a particular product, it evokes a certain response from consumers. The iconic head of a cartoon mouse with the creator's signature scrawled below it for instance, represents family, fun, quality, and vacation destinations for most people.
It is not okay for another company to come along and use the mouse ears on its own product as a way of gaining credibility or implying some association with the brand. This is diluting a trademark. It makes no difference if the product this company is advertising is totally unrelated to the mouse ear brand. Using the logo in any way is against the law.
Not every company can claim its trademarks qualify for this special status. They have to meet several markers. The most important one is fame. The logo and brand in question must have instant recognition with the general public. There are not exact requirements to meet the marker. Courts decide that on an individual basis.
Not only does a logo have to be instantly recognizable, it must have had that level of fame at the time of the offense. For example, if the logo was relevant at one time, but less so when the incident occurred, the courts may rule that the trademark is no longer famous enough to warrant bringing the suit. It is not necessary for a company to prove it was actually harmed by the dilution. The fact that is occurred is enough to win the lawsuit.
Diluting trademarks can take several forms. Blurring occurs when someone uses a logo on a product that may be totally unrelated to the original brand. It might be something like the swoosh of an athletic shoe logo placed on a can of paint. Even though the two are unrelated, the use on the paint can potentially dilutes the distinctiveness of the logo on the athletic shoes.
Tarnishment occurs when a party uses a famous logo in a way that damages the brand of the original product. Putting the famous mouse head on packaging for tobacco would be an example of tarnishing. Freeriding is when someone intentionally takes a famous logo and uses it on a competing product to confuse the consumer and generate business by associating itself with the original company.
Millions of dollars are spent each year to enhance and protect brands. Conglomerates don't appreciate anyone tampering with theirs. They will sue, and they usually win.
Some brands are so well known that their logos are immediately recognizable and associated with nothing but them. Corporations spend millions of dollars creating and maintaining their brand identity. Not only is the logo associated with a particular product, it evokes a certain response from consumers. The iconic head of a cartoon mouse with the creator's signature scrawled below it for instance, represents family, fun, quality, and vacation destinations for most people.
It is not okay for another company to come along and use the mouse ears on its own product as a way of gaining credibility or implying some association with the brand. This is diluting a trademark. It makes no difference if the product this company is advertising is totally unrelated to the mouse ear brand. Using the logo in any way is against the law.
Not every company can claim its trademarks qualify for this special status. They have to meet several markers. The most important one is fame. The logo and brand in question must have instant recognition with the general public. There are not exact requirements to meet the marker. Courts decide that on an individual basis.
Not only does a logo have to be instantly recognizable, it must have had that level of fame at the time of the offense. For example, if the logo was relevant at one time, but less so when the incident occurred, the courts may rule that the trademark is no longer famous enough to warrant bringing the suit. It is not necessary for a company to prove it was actually harmed by the dilution. The fact that is occurred is enough to win the lawsuit.
Diluting trademarks can take several forms. Blurring occurs when someone uses a logo on a product that may be totally unrelated to the original brand. It might be something like the swoosh of an athletic shoe logo placed on a can of paint. Even though the two are unrelated, the use on the paint can potentially dilutes the distinctiveness of the logo on the athletic shoes.
Tarnishment occurs when a party uses a famous logo in a way that damages the brand of the original product. Putting the famous mouse head on packaging for tobacco would be an example of tarnishing. Freeriding is when someone intentionally takes a famous logo and uses it on a competing product to confuse the consumer and generate business by associating itself with the original company.
Millions of dollars are spent each year to enhance and protect brands. Conglomerates don't appreciate anyone tampering with theirs. They will sue, and they usually win.
About the Author:
When you are searching for information about trademark dilution, come to our web pages today. More details can be viewed at http://www.aeilaw.com/practice-areas/#business-law now.
No comments:
Post a Comment