Recent Significant Trademark Decisions
- Booking.com B.V. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office (2020): Significance: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a generic term, like "booking," could become a protectable trademark when combined with ".com." This decision expanded the scope of trademark protection for online businesses.
- Iancu v. Brunetti (2019): Significance: The Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act's ban on registering immoral or scandalous trademarks violated the First Amendment. This decision allowed the registration of previously prohibited marks.
- USPTO v. Booking.com (2020): Significance: The Supreme Court ruled that "generic.com" terms can be registered as trademarks if they have acquired distinctiveness. This further expanded the protection of domain-based trademarks.
- Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. (2020): Significance: The Supreme Court clarified the standard for trademark infringement damages. The ruling made it easier for plaintiffs to recover profits in trademark infringement cases.
- Unicolors, Inc. v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P. (2020): Significance: This case clarified the copyright implications in trademark litigation, emphasizing the importance of copyright registration for designs used as trademarks.
- Re: Michael Gleissner (2019): Significance: In a case involving the abusive filing of trademarks, the decision highlighted the importance of actively using and maintaining registered trademarks.
- B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. (2019): Significance: This case reinforced the principle of issue preclusion in trademark litigation, where prior decisions on trademark issues can have a preclusive effect in later disputes.
- In re Tam (2017): Significance: The Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act's ban on registering disparaging trademarks violated the First Amendment, allowing the registration of such marks.
- Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. My Other Bag, Inc. (2016): Significance: This case dealt with parody and fair use in trademark law, setting a precedent for balancing trademark protection with First Amendment rights.
- Jack Daniel's Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC (2019): Significance: In this case, Jack Daniel's successfully protected its trademark rights against a company selling a "Bad Spaniels" dog toy that resembled its iconic whiskey label. The decision reaffirmed the importance of defending trademark rights against potential infringements, even in creative or humorous contexts.
