A Reply to Swann and Palladino's Critique of Folsom and Teply's Model Survey
Creighton University - School of Law
University of San Diego School of Law
November, 28 2010
The Trademark Reporter, Vol 197, 1988
This article is a reply to a critique of the authors’ model survey relating to generic names and brand names in trademark litigation. The article lists several critiques by two leading members of the trademark bar and responds to each of those critiques. The article starts by discussing the primary significance test, which in general, describes how to determine whether the primary significance of a word is a generic term or a trademark. It then moves on to explain how the primary significance test should be applied when consumers understand a word to be both a generic term and a trademark. The final areas that the article covers are the role of potential consumer confusion in the primary significance test, how the survey should be conducted, and what should be included in the survey.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 31
Keywords: Intellectual Property, trademarks, litigation, primary significance test, generic term, brand name, consumersAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: November 29, 2010
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.422 seconds