14 Cited authorities

Conopco, Inc. v. Campbell Soup Company
95 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 1996) Cited 270 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that when the statute of limitations period has not run, a defendant may claim laches but has the burden of proof to demonstrate it
Marshak v. Green
746 F.2d 927 (2d Cir. 1984) Cited 91 times
Holding that a trade name or mark “is merely a symbol of goodwill; it has no independent significance apart from the goodwill it symbolizes”
Madrigal Audio Laboratories, Inc. v. Cello, Ltd.
799 F.2d 814 (2d Cir. 1986) Cited 41 times
Holding that, "though an individual may sell the right to use his personal name . . . a court will not bar him from using that name unless his 'intention to convey an exclusive right to the use of [his] own name' is 'clearly shown'"
Flack v. Friends of Queen Catherine Inc.
139 F. Supp. 2d 526 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) Cited 14 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a presumption created in the context of a preliminary injunction only applies to prospective violations of the law
Colgate-Palmolive Company v. Tullos
219 F.2d 617 (5th Cir. 1955) Cited 3 times
No. 15239. March 2, 1955. C. Baxter Jones, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., Sutherland, Asbill Brennan, Atlanta, Ga., of counsel, for appellant. John L. Westmoreland and John L. Westmoreland, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for appellee. Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, HOLMES, Circuit Judge, and DAWKINS, District Judge. HOLMES, Circuit Judge. This appeal is from a judgment against the Colgate-Palmolive Company, Inc., in favor of the appellee, Mrs. Frances P. Tullos, for damages suffered by her by reason of the publication,
Jaccard v. Macy Co., Inc.
265 App. Div. 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942) Cited 6 times
October 30, 1942. Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County, HOFSTADTER, J. Gustave B. Garfield for appellants. Leon Lauterstein, Emanuel Dannett and Joseph F. Finnegan for respondent. PER CURIAM. In addition to the reasons upon which the trial court based its decision in awarding judgment to defendant, we find that such judgment was warranted for the further reason that the dress involved herein had been placed in the public domain without the protection of copyright. Accordingly, in the absence
Jaccard v. Macy Co.
176 Misc. 88 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1941) Cited 6 times
Holding that “ name assumed for business purposes only, the exclusive use of which has been granted to a corporation,” was not within the protection of New York's right to privacy law prohibiting the use of another's name for the purpose of trade without consent
Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden
15 U.S.C. § 1125 Cited 15,291 times 320 Legal Analyses
Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"
Section 101 - Definitions
17 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 6,355 times 174 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886
Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter
15 U.S.C. § 1127 Cited 2,943 times 95 Legal Analyses
Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,578 times 260 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"
Section 106A - Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity
17 U.S.C. § 106A Cited 181 times 23 Legal Analyses
Granting to "the author of a work of visual art" an inalienable right to prevent "distortion, mutilation, or other modification" which might prejudice the author’s "honor or reputation"
Section 360-L - Injury to business reputation; dilution
N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 360-L Cited 156 times 1 Legal Analyses
Allowing liability "notwithstanding the absence of competition between the parties or the absence of confusion as to the source of goods or services."
Section 133 - Use of name or address with intent to deceive
N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 133 Cited 93 times
Prohibiting uses "which may deceive or mislead the public"

MacKenzie-Childs Ltd. v. MacKenzie-Childs et al

14 Cited authorities

Holding that when the statute of limitations period has not run, a defendant may claim laches but has the burden of proof to demonstrate it

Holding that a trade name or mark “is merely a symbol of goodwill; it has no independent significance apart from the goodwill it symbolizes”

Holding that, "though an individual may sell the right to use his personal name . . . a court will not bar him from using that name unless his 'intention to convey an exclusive right to the use of [his] own name' is 'clearly shown'"

Holding that a presumption created in the context of a preliminary injunction only applies to prospective violations of the law

Holding that “ name assumed for business purposes only, the exclusive use of which has been granted to a corporation,” was not within the protection of New York's right to privacy law prohibiting the use of another's name for the purpose of trade without consent

Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"

Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886

Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

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"

Granting to "the author of a work of visual art" an inalienable right to prevent "distortion, mutilation, or other modification" which might prejudice the author’s "honor or reputation"

Allowing liability "notwithstanding the absence of competition between the parties or the absence of confusion as to the source of goods or services."

Prohibiting uses "which may deceive or mislead the public"