A WORK OF FICTION
will be obvious, from the names of the parties and the names of the trademarks
and service marks (and the data related to them), that this is a work
Since it will require an investment of time to review the case, it is assumed that anyone doing so has an interest in learning about trademark law. No single case can have facts which will permit analysis of every aspect of trademark law, but the facts in this case have been created to permit analysis of a number of those aspects. The challenge is to achieve that goal in a work of fiction.
A second challenge is to permit those who have an interest in a part of the story, and who wish to limit review to certain points, to extract matters of interest to them without becoming bogged down by a perceived necessity to read everything.
The various segments of this story are numbered (approximately) sequentially, so that you can determine where you are at any given time by looking at the number in parentheses at the end of the title of the page. If you leave for a while and want to come back and pick up where you left off (or if you just want to look at the segments), just go to trademark-index.html.
We hope we have structured the facts so that they permit the desired analysis of the key trademark principles considered, and compartmentalized enough to rise to the second challenge.
It should also be noted that no attempt has been made to make the discussion of the trademark principles presented by this case exhaustive or complete. Trademark law is complex and highly subjective and far more needs to be said about it than we could possibly say here (the definitive source with respect to trademark law is, in our opinion, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, a seven volume set with a list price of nearly $3000).
(c) Copyright 2010-2014 Milliken PLC