Category: Volume 3, Issue 2

The Expansion of Trademark Rights in Europe

by Irina Pak, BPP Law School, U.K.

from Volume 3, Issue 2 (Spring 2013)

Download this Article in PDF format from The Jerome Hall Law Library’s Digital Repository.

Abstract: This Essay will argue that trademarks in the European Union (EU) presently enjoy sufficient protection and that further expansion of the proprietor’s rights may adversely affect the consumer. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has played a major role in expanding trademark protection: it gave a wide interpretation to the meaning of ‘use’ under Article 5(1)(a) of the EU Trademarks Directive and accepted that the mark’s owner is entitled to protection of the investment per se in L’Oréal SA v. Bellure NV (the L’Oréal case). Hence, recognizing other functions of marks and granting them legal protection creates the danger of shifting protection away from consumers

A Decade of Registered and Unregistered Design Rights Decisions in the UK: What Conclusions Can We Draw for the Future of Both Types of Rights?

by Estelle Derclaye, University of Notthingham, U.K.

from Volume 3, Issue 2 (Spring 2013)

Download this Article in PDF format from The Jerome Hall Law Library’s Digital Repository.

Abstract: This Article analyses the case law of the courts of England and Wales since the introduction of the UKUDR in August 1989, the implementation of the Design Directive in October 2001, and the coming into force of the Design Regulation in March 2002. To this effect, two tables of the decisions were compiled, one listing the UKUDR decisions and the other, the decisions relating to the UKRDR, the CRDR, and the CUDR. The tables can be found in the appendices at the end of this Article. The tables list the name of the parties, the type of design, the date of the decision, the court and the judge(s) who handed down the decision, and whether or not the decision was reported. The tables do not make a comparison of all aspects of the rights as may have been discussed in the cases, but instead only list whether the design was found valid and/or infringed. The list of cases is complete as of November 1, 2012, to the best of my knowledge, but does not include any unreported cases not included one way or another in the legal databases.

Goodwill U: School Name Change & Trademark Law

by Alexandra J. Roberts, University of New Hampshire (Concord)

from Volume 3, Issue 2 (Spring 2013)

Download this Article in PDF format from The Jerome Hall Law Library’s Digital Repository.

Abstract: Despite the high stakes in school name changes, schools seem to be renamed just as often as are traditional goods. A new name might acknowledge a major benefactor, reflect a change in the school’s status or affiliation, seek to clarify existing misconceptions, or serve as a component of a comprehensive rebranding initiative. Yet when an existing institution abandons one name and adopts another, its actions beget a host of trademark issues, some of which cannot be adequately understood by analogy to traditional brand and product name changes. School name changes can confuse or deceive consumers and infringe competitor schools’ marks, affecting alumni of all of the schools involved. Adopting a new name often necessitates that a school abandon a prior name that has acquired extensive goodwill, to the detriment of past, current, and future students. New names, especially those that honor living donors, risk tarnishing schools’ trademarks by associating them with controversial figures. In addition, renaming may deeply harm alumni, who serve as not only their alma mater’s consumers, but as its products. This Essay identifies and explores some of the intellectual property issues that university renaming raises and the trademark ramifications for alumni, including infringement, dilution, and abandonment of goodwill.

Not (Necessarily) Narrower: Rethinking the Relative Scope of Copyright Protection for Designs

by Sarah Burstein, University of Oklahoma (Norman Campus)

from Volume 3, Issue 2 (Spring 2013)

Download this Article in PDF format from The Jerome Hall Law Library’s Digital Repository.

Abstract: This Essay briefly reviews the relevant portions of U.S. design patent and copyright law and the limiting copyright doctrines discussed by prior commentators. Based on this preliminary analysis, this Essay concludes that a right to prevent copying designs could be just as broad as— if not broader than—design patent protection. If this is true, then many of the arguments made in support of adopting a copyright-like regime to protect designs need to be reexamined.

Explaining the Supreme Court’s Interest in Patent Law

by Timothy R. Holbrook, Emory University School of Law

from Volume 3, Issue 2 (Spring 2013)

Download this Article in PDF format from The Jerome Hall Law Library’s Digital Repository.

Abstract: This Paper explores a variety of explanations for the Supreme Court’s recent intervention in patent law. In all likelihood, there is no singular motivation for the Supreme Court’s activity, and it may very well be a combination of some or all of these factors. Nevertheless, exploring these potential rationales offers insight into the workings of the Supreme Court and could aid those seeking certiorari in framing their particular issue to garner the Court’s attention.