532 U.S. 23 (2001) Cited 585 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that the dual-spring design was not protectable because it had a purpose “beyond serving the purpose of informing consumers that the sign stands are made by” the plaintiff
514 U.S. 159 (1995) Cited 566 times 51 Legal Analyses
Holding companies may not "inhibit[] legitimate competition" by trademarking desirable features to "put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage"
489 U.S. 141 (1989) Cited 567 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state law prohibiting people from copying unpatentable boat hull designs was preempted because it sought to provide patent-like protection to boat designs not protectable by patent laws and it "contravenes the ultimate goal of public disclosure and use that is the centerpiece of federal patent policy"
Holding that defendant's trade dress was not likely to be confused with that of plaintiff because of conspicuous placement on accused dress of defendant's identifying marks
Holding that "Copying is only evidence of secondary meaning if the defendant's intent in copying is to confuse consumers and pass off his product as the plaintiff's. In that situation, the defendant's belief that plaintiff's trade dress has acquired secondary meaning — so that his copying will indeed facilitate his passing off — is some evidence that the trade dress actually has acquired secondary meaning."
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,585 times 272 Legal Analyses
Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"