Thursday, March 04, 2010

Does the doctrine of first sale immunize a buyer against trademark tarnishment?

From the Bridgewater, NJ library lot on March 4, 2010.

Back in 2007, IPBiz illustrated the flaws in Hamilton, NJ being a "safest city" by illustrating a car parked in the library lot with six bullet holes in its side. In 2010, IPBiz shows the more subtle things that one finds in the Bridgewater library lot. [Note: urban dictionary says: When a really cool person drives an Impala, it can be dubbed a Pimpala.]

from chilling effects on trademark tarnishment:

Trademark "tarnishment," a kind of dilution, can occur if a non-owner uses the mark in connection with shoddy or unsavory products or services, illegal activity, or activity that is likely to offend the average person. For example, using a Walt Disney trademark on a website filled with pornography could be claimed to tarnish the reputation of the Disney mark in the minds of viewers who saw this material. Tarnishment is not always actionable -- it might be non-commercial or parody use.

from Stanford's cyberlaw on trademark disparagement:

The Ninth Circuit rejected TFN’s allegation of “trademark disparagment,” finding no such claim exists under the Lanham Act.

IPBiz query: would the doctrine of first sale extinguish claims by the trademark owner against a purchaser?

Of the car in Hamilton, NJ:

Of other disparagement:

As a separate matter, is the following in Greece, in Mexico, or elsewhere:


Post a Comment

<< Home