When.com Web Search

  1. Ads

    related to: us trademark law pdf search free

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Lanham Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act

    The Lanham (Trademark) Act (Pub. L. 79–489, 60 Stat. 427, enacted July 5, 1946, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. (15 U.S.C. ch. 22) is the primary federal trademark statute in the United States. In other words, the Act is the primary statutory foundation of United States trademark law at the federal level.

  3. List of United States Supreme Court trademark case law

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    A court of appeals decision regarding trademark registration affirming the Commissioner of Patent's decision, and directing the clerk to certify its opinion to the Commissioner, is not final and appealable to the Supreme Court. A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Broderick & Bascom Rope Co. 201 U.S. 166.

  4. United States trademark law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_trademark_law

    A trademark is a word, phrase, or logo that identifies the source of goods or services. [ 1 ] Trademark law protects a business' commercial identity or brand by discouraging other businesses from adopting a name or logo that is "confusingly similar" to an existing trademark. The goal is to allow consumers to easily identify the producers of ...

  5. Vidal v. Elster - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidal_v._Elster

    Vidal v. Elster, 602 U.S. 286, is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with 15 U.S.C. § 1052, a provision of the Lanham Act regarding trademarks using the name of living individuals without their consent. The court decided that the provision does not violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. [1][2]

  6. Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inwood_Laboratories,_Inc...

    Lanham Act. Inwood Laboratories Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc., 456 U.S. 844 (1982), is a United States Supreme Court case, in which the Court confirmed the application of and set out a test for contributory trademark liability under § 32 of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1114). [1][2]

  7. Iancu v. Brunetti - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iancu_v._Brunetti

    Justice Samuel Alito wrote a concurring opinion, pointing out that the Court had to make this decision because of the vagueness of the "immoral" and "scandalous" terms in the law, but Congress is empowered to create law that would make a more narrow determination that removed the viewpoint discrimination concern for the Office.

  8. Unconstitutional trademark acts - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconstitutional_trademark...

    This page was last edited on 2 September 2019, at 02:44 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply.

  9. Federal Trademark Dilution Act - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trademark_Dilution_Act

    Federal Trademark Dilution Act. The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–98 (text) (PDF)) is a United States federal law which protects famous trademarks from uses that dilute their distinctiveness, even in the absence of any likelihood of confusion or competition. It went into effect on January 16, 1996.