There are people who would never dream of stealing a car or robbing a bank, yet when it comes to someone else's art, don't have any qualms about using it for their own purposes. They take photos, drawings, music, and corporate logos without thought. The internet has made this easier than ever to do. At the very least this is an infringement of copyright law. In the case of famous brands, it can be considered trademark dilution, and subject to serious penalties.
There are logos people around the world instantly recognize and associate with a particular company alone. Corporations have huge budgets set aside to maintain and enhance their brand identity. The logos not only represents a specific product, or conglomeration of products, they often evoke specific feelings in consumers. The silhouette of an iconic mouse's head with the artist's signature below for example, represents family values, vacation destinations, and quality for most.
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.
Branding is serious business. Conglomerates have fleets of lawyers on the lookout for coypcats. They understand trademark law and will use it to halt any perceived violations.
There are logos people around the world instantly recognize and associate with a particular company alone. Corporations have huge budgets set aside to maintain and enhance their brand identity. The logos not only represents a specific product, or conglomeration of products, they often evoke specific feelings in consumers. The silhouette of an iconic mouse's head with the artist's signature below for example, represents family values, vacation destinations, and quality for most.
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.
Branding is serious business. Conglomerates have fleets of lawyers on the lookout for coypcats. They understand trademark law and will use it to halt any perceived violations.
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.
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар