Towards Recognizing and Reconciling the Multiplicity of Values and Interests in Trademark Law

76 Pages Posted: 24 Mar 2012

See all articles by Michael S. Mireles

Michael S. Mireles

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law

Date Written: March 20, 2012

Abstract

This paper argues that courts should follow the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Winters v. National Resources Defense Counsel, Inc. and eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. in curbing the "harmful effects" of so-called "trademark bullies" or "trademark extortionists" by limiting the grant of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. Current trademark doctrine and policy fail to adequately account for all of the relevant interests and values implicated in trademark disputes, and the consumer search cost theory fails to provide adequate limits on the scope of trademark protection. Thus, courts should balance the relevant interests and values recognized by current trademark doctrine and policy and other concerns such as freedom of expression under the public interest test for injunctive relief. This paper also proposes that courts should not consider evidence of policing of a mark in, for example, determining the mark's strength.

Suggested Citation

Mireles, Michael S., Towards Recognizing and Reconciling the Multiplicity of Values and Interests in Trademark Law (March 20, 2012). Indiana Law Review, Vol. 44, No. 427, 2011; Pacific McGeorge School of Law Research Paper No. 12-03. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2026654

Michael S. Mireles (Contact Author)

University of the Pacific - McGeorge School of Law ( email )

3200 Fifth Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95817
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
62
Abstract Views
697
rank
374,287
PlumX Metrics