A trademark can be an essential platform for strengthening a company’s goodwill. A trademark entails any symbol, word, or phrase that can be identified with firm’s products and services. These items might be qualified as trademarks when they gain a signifying meaning among the company’s customer base (Maggs and Schechter 4). Nonetheless, the misuse of this proprietary asset can result in lack of legal protection and confusion among customers since it might be difficult to deduce the origin and identity of a particular product. As such, some companies have resorted to unconventional means of protecting their trademarks. This paper will discuss the trademark problems facing the assigned case study of VELCRO with reference to relevant statutory …show more content…
As such, the company’s attempts to protect the inappropriate use of VELCRO trademark might be futile. According to the amended U.S. Trademark Act of 1946, any registered mark, symbol, or word that becomes a generic trademark is entitled to cancellation (17). Therefore, the mark will lose its legal protection under the Trademark Act once it becomes a generic mark. It means that VELCRO will lack the legal right to sue any infringers of the VELCRO mark based on the Trademark Act of 1946. In Dial-A-Mattress Franchise Corporation v. Anthony Page et al., the judge held that the plaintiff could not register the name “mattress.com” as a trademark; thus, the suit was subject to rejection. In this case, the judge reasoned that the word “mattress” was not exclusive to the plaintiff’s products alone as it could also encompass the competitors’ products. Further, the word would not sustain any legal protection if infringers used it with a spelling mistake such as “mattres.” A similar reasoning might apply in VELCTRO’s case. To enumerate, the word “hook-and-loop” might mean various things other than VELCTRO’s brand. As such, the company might lack legal protection in case of
v. VIP Prods., LLC 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (Mo., 2008) Anheuser-Busch makes a distinction between confusing and non-confusing parodies, the latter being protected as a parody. The important factors in the case were that the price point of the products was the same, they were directly competing goods and the survey showed that there was a level of confusion (30.3% were confused), in addition, consideration was placed on irreparable harm caused by the defendants use of the mark, the priority lay with the first to register the trademark, lastly the District Court considered public interest, i.e. whether the public was deceived. Similarly in Starbucks Corp v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc., 588 F3d 97 (2d Cir. 2007) the court distinguished Louis Vuitton S.A. v Haute Diggty Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007) by holding that if (as in the Louis Vuitton case), the mark is used in non-competing goods, the defendant conveyed that it was not the source of the plaintiffs product and if the actual use of the mark does not impair the distinctiveness of the plaintiff’s mark there may be an argument in favor of the defendant, however, if the defendant’s humor is not conveyed to the public, and does not increase the public identification of the plaintiff’s mark with its mark it will fail to establish
We are all consumers, and we buy diverse products every day. But, do you know what the main factor is that influences us to choose a product? If someone selects a cloth, maybe he pays attention to its quality! Customers’ decisions can be changed depending on what the main factors they are looking at. Various influences can cause consumers to select different products.
The company offers a Store Manager position in a boutique. He/she should drive a goal oriented team. The vital purpose is to do all the processes such as store operation. Hence, to lead, control and mentor assistant managers, visual managers, and all the employees.
Facts of the Case: In 2008, Samantha Elauf applied for a job at Abercrombie & Fitch, Inc., who as part of their “Look Policy” prohibit the use of caps. Elauf, as part of her religious practice, wore a headscarf to the interview. She was interviewed by assistant manager Heather Cooke, who gave her a score that qualified her to be hired. Cooke, however, was worried that Elauf’s headscarf was against the store’s policy and called her district manager Randall Johnson. She informed Johnson of her belief that Elauf wore her headscarf because of her religion, and Johnson replied that headwear whether it was religious or not violated the “Look Policy” of the store. Elauf with the help of the EEOC sued Abercrombie on the grounds of religious discrimination. The U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is an agency established by the government of the United States that imposes federal laws that make it
In every given business, the name itself portrays different meanings. This serves as the reference point and sometimes the basis of customers on what to expect within the company. Since personality affects product image (Langmeyer & Shank, 1994), the presence of brand helps in the realization of this concept. Traditionally, brand is a symbolic manifestation of all the information connected with a company, product, or service (Nilson, 2003; Olin, 2003). A brand is typically composed of a name, logo, and other visual elements such as images, colors, and icons (Gillooley & Varley, 2001; Laforet & Saunders, 1994)). It is believed that a brand puts an impression to the consumer on what to expect to the product or service being offered (Mere, 1995). In other application, brand may be referred as trademark, which is legally appropriate term. The brand is the most powerful weapon in the market (LePla & Parker, 1999). Brands possess personality in which people associate their experience. Oftentimes, they are related to the core values the company executes.
Licensing is the process whereby some companies create an instant brand by paying a fee to use the names or symbols of an already established brand, or the name of a celebrity or film character. The original owner of the brand is called the licensor while the company that pays a fee to use the brand is called the licensee. The licensor benefits due to the increased revenue beyond their normal revenue and profit stream. It also increases the overall awareness of the brand and attracts new customers to the brand. The licensee benefits because they do not have to spend the large amounts of time and money that it takes to build a reputable brand. The name or symbol that they now use has more credibility than competitors through brand association. Licensing is a very popular option as these names, symbols or film characters are already extensively known, such as Disney school supplies, toys and
In the absence of registered trade mark rights, case law suggests as a general principle, that mere similarity of goods is not enough for an actionable wrong to occur. Passing off derives from the common law action deceit which is the civil action for fraudulent misrepresentation. Passing off is a non-statutory cause of action that has developed over the years through case law and has changed considerably overtime. Passing off came into existence long before trademarks became registerable and has always been available at common law for marks refused registration, not registered or ineligible for
Case Study: Victoria's Secret OVERVIEW Victoria's Secret, one of the world's most recognizable fashion brands, established itself in the Bay Area in the early 1970s. Originally owned by an ambitious Stanford graduate looking for a comfortable and high-end retailer to buy his wife lingerie, Roy Raymond opened the first store at Stanford Shopping Center. Styled after a Victorian boudoir, Raymond's success prompted him to open three other locations, a catalog business, and a corporate headquarters within a few years. His inability to balance finances with his creative vision, Roy Raymond fell into trouble and was forced to sell his company for the small sum of $1 million dollars to The Limited, an Ohio-based conglomerate owned by Les Wexner.
Patagonia Inc. is an American clothing company that produces and sells outdoor gear, sports clothing and equipment for men, women and children.
There are 5 main steps which are involved in the supply chain of manufacturing a T-shirt. The initial step is planting and harvesting. It all begins with the cotton cutter, a machine issued to cut the flowers of cotton. The second step involves weaving the fiber into cloths. This process is called carding in which the raw cotton fiber is run through a machine where it is pressed. After it is softened up, it is then used to form the yarn and then into cloth sheets. The third stage of this process involves the shipment of cloth to the distributors. It is then prepared to be made into its final form such as correct sizes, color, and texture. There is then a purification and cleaning which includes the cloth bleached so that is it then fine and smooth. This stage will prepare the cloth to be final form by making it fine, smooth and of proper size so that T-shirts can be made from it. The last stage, is the shipping of the finished products to the warehouses and from there it is shipped to the various retailers as per their orders. From the retailer end, the product is then made available to consumers so they can buy these T-shirts for themselves.
Hennes & Mauritz AB (H&M) is a well-known fashion retailing firm that sells fast-fashion clothing for women and youngsters. It is based in Stockholm, Sweden. As of 2013, H&M operates around 2,600 stores in over 55 countries and employed around 116,000 work forces.
Companies use a collection of brand equities to represent their products in the market (Voolnes, 2012). Brand equity refers to the commercial value that is derived from the perception of consumers on any given brand name of particular products in the market as opposed to the product itself. Ataman (2003) notes that the effect to the consumer is in the brand name and not the product itself. Companies use logos, trademarks and a collection of other symbols to present this information to the customers. The use of these symbols is meant to try and capture the customer mindset so that they can be thinking about the company products at all times through the items they possess at home (Estes, Gibbert, Guest, & Mazursk, 2012). This can well be explained by use of the customer-based brand equity model that brings together the requirements for a publicly renowned brand in the market.
Whenever a company enters a new market, it is sometimes forced to alter its products to suit the new legal requirements and economic considerations in its new country of operation. The legal requirements often range from: packaging requirements, environmental-protection regulations, indirect legal considerations, and issues of standardization. On the other hand, economic considerations entail considering the income of the target consumers, price reduction or alteration for effective competition, and inflationary forces. This paper discusses seven scenarios where a product or multinational company originally from the United States and operating in the Middle East, North Africa, or in the Gulf countries was forced to alter its brand.
Shultz II, C.J and Saporito, B. (1996), ‘Protecting Intellectual Property: Strategies and Recommendations to Deter Counterfeiting and Brand Piracy in Global Markets’, The Columbia Journal of World Business, 31(1): pp. 18-28.
In conclusion, design laws in relation to intellectual property have changed and developed to suit today’s globally expanding technology and communication. While these laws have not changed as frequently and dramatically as other sections of Intellectual Property, it is proven to update as needed. The upcoming changes in regulation for easing design’s registration is a step in the right direction for businesses although it can be difficult to manage. It encourages innovation in different industries, but doubtfully will stop counterfeiting on a large scale. Changing design regulations implements secrecy in relation to developing the best option for an entire society (i.e. health products), but essentially allows a creator to take control, ownership and usage of his or her new and distinctive work.