Hylly
Henkilönnimi Johnson, Phillip, kirjoittaja.
Nimeke- ja vastuullisuusmerkintö Enhanced Distinctiveness and Why “Strong Marks” Are Causing Us All Confusion
Julkaistu Springer, Heidelberg : 2024.
Ulkoasutiedot
Sarjamerkintö ei-lisäkirjausmuodossa IIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, ISSN 0018-9855 ; 55(2)
Huomautus sisällöstä, tiivistelmä tms. A “strong” trade mark, one which has a high level of distinctiveness , is entitled to a greater level of protection in the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States than other weaker marks. The psychological and marketing evidence suggests that, in fact, stronger marks are less likely to be confused by consumers. Accordingly, courts and tribunals are required to find confusion in cases involving strong marks even where the facts do not support it. The antecedence for this legal fiction (normative correction or public policy choice) is confused, it makes the law conceptually uncertain and now that marks with a sufficient reputation are entitled to protection from dilution, the fiction has become unsupportable from a normative perspective. Indeed, it appears that a neutral approach – that is not taking into account that it is a “stronger” mark during any confusion analysis – does little, if any, harm to the proprietors of strong marks and clearly benefits competitors. It is argued therefore that the rule giving more protection to strong marks (whether it is inherent or acquired strength) should be abolished.
Yhteisönnimi
Asiasana
Maantieteellinen nimi asiasanana
Asiasana - Kontrolloimaton
Sarjalisäkirjaus - yhtenäistetty nimeke IIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 0018-9855 ; 55(2).
Elektronisen aineiston sijainti ja käyttö (URI) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01400-0 Linkki verkkoaineistoon
*000 ab a ar
*00124710
*008 s2024 gw e |||| 0|eng |
*040 $aFI-CUTE$bfin$erda
*0410 $aeng
*1001 $aJohnson, Phillip,$ekirjoittaja.
*24510$aEnhanced Distinctiveness and Why “Strong Marks” Are Causing Us All Confusion /$cPhillip Johnson.
*264 1$aHeidelberg :$bSpringer,$c2024.
*300 $as. 185-212
*336 $ateksti$btxt$2rdacontent
*337 $akäytettävissä ilman laitetta$bn$2rdamedia
*338 $anide$bnc$2rdacarrier
*4901 $aIIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v55(2)
*520 $aA “strong” trade mark, one which has a high level of distinctiveness , is entitled to a greater level of protection in the European Union, the United Kingdom and the United States than other weaker marks. The psychological and marketing evidence suggests that, in fact, stronger marks are less likely to be confused by consumers. Accordingly, courts and tribunals are required to find confusion in cases involving strong marks even where the facts do not support it. The antecedence for this legal fiction (normative correction or public policy choice) is confused, it makes the law conceptually uncertain and now that marks with a sufficient reputation are entitled to protection from dilution, the fiction has become unsupportable from a normative perspective. Indeed, it appears that a neutral approach – that is not taking into account that it is a “stronger” mark during any confusion analysis – does little, if any, harm to the proprietors of strong marks and clearly benefits competitors. It is argued therefore that the rule giving more protection to strong marks (whether it is inherent or acquired strength) should be abolished.
*61024$aEuroopan unioni$0(FI-ASTERI-N)000035482
*650 7$atavaramerkit$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p1488
*650 7$atavaramerkkilaki$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p21904
*651 7$aIso-Britannia$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p104990
*651 7$aYhdysvallat$2yso/fin$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105078
*651 7$aAustralia$0http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p105116$2yso/fin
*653 $adistinctiveness
*830 0$aIIC : International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law,$x0018-9855 ;$v55(2).
*852 $hSA-IIC
*856 $uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01400-0$yLinkki verkkoaineistoon
^
Tästä teoksesta ei ole arvioita.
Näpäytä
kun haluat kirjoittaa ensimmäisen arvion.