The IT Law Wiki

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
 
'''Citation:''' Horphag Research Ltd. v. Pellegrini, 337 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2003)([http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7223987747924639695&q=337+F.3d+1036&hl=en&as_sdt=2002 full-text]).
== Citation ==
 
 
'''Horphag Research Ltd. v. Pellegrini,''' 337 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2003) ([http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7223987747924639695&q=337+F.3d+1036&hl=en&as_sdt=2002 full-text]).
 
   
 
== Factual Background ==
 
== Factual Background ==
Line 10: Line 8:
   
 
The appellate court held that this use of the [[trademark|mark]] was [[prima facie]] [[trademark infringement|infringing]]. It rejected the defendant’s defense of [[nominative fair use]], on the ground that defendant’s conduct failed to meet the requirement that “the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the [[trademark|mark]], suggest [[sponsorship]] or [[endorsement]] by the [[trademark owner|trademark holder]].” Here, the court found that defendant’s “references to Pycnogenol spawn [[likelihood of confusion|confusion]] as to [[sponsorship]] and attempt to appropriate the cachet of the [[trademark]] Pycnogenol to his product.”
 
The appellate court held that this use of the [[trademark|mark]] was [[prima facie]] [[trademark infringement|infringing]]. It rejected the defendant’s defense of [[nominative fair use]], on the ground that defendant’s conduct failed to meet the requirement that “the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the [[trademark|mark]], suggest [[sponsorship]] or [[endorsement]] by the [[trademark owner|trademark holder]].” Here, the court found that defendant’s “references to Pycnogenol spawn [[likelihood of confusion|confusion]] as to [[sponsorship]] and attempt to appropriate the cachet of the [[trademark]] Pycnogenol to his product.”
  +
 
[[Category:Case]]
 
[[Category:Case]]
 
[[Category:Case-U.S.-Federal]]
 
[[Category:Case-U.S.-Federal]]

Please note that all contributions to the The IT Law Wiki are considered to be released under the CC-BY-SA

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)