LEB 320F 37-55 Exam with correct Answers
trademark - Answer -protect distinctive words, phrases, symbols, and devices adopted for purpose of identifying origin of goods and services available for sale
-short and simple words
- protectable types are suggestive, arbitrary or fanciful
Genericide - Answer -When a trademark becomes so well known that it becomes the generic term for a product, and trademark rights are lost
secondary meaning - Answer -A brand name that has evolved from an ordinary term.
-think michael dell
suggestive terms - Answer -Terms that suggest rather than describe a product automatically qualify for trademark protection. A suggestive term leaves something to the consumer's imagination
arbitrary terms - Answer -A term, name, symbol or other device that has no bearing on a particular good; automatically qualifies for trademark protection
-apple
fanciful - Answer -word that did not exist before company invented
Trademark Infringement: likely confusion - Answer -- plaintiff has burden of proving defendants use of trademark will produce buyer confusion -remedy if case is won by plaintiff is injunction and damages, can even recover infringers profit from selling goods
Trademark Infringement: anti dilution - Answer -FTDA- if its famors right can be asserted even when goods are not similar
*a mark not famous if it is just widely known in local geographic area or niche market
University of Texas v. KST Electric: Trademarks kst - Answer -• KST uses longhorn logo • Likelihood of confusion is probable b/c makes it seem as if KST is endorsed by UT • UT has niche fame • UT's evidence fails to demonstrate the high level of recognition to show fame under TDRA, summary judgement is appropriate on this claim UT's dilution claim is dismissed but trademark infringement and unfair competition will go to trial • UT has not created a genuine issue of material fact that the longhorn logo is a "household name" so b/c UT's evidence failts to demonstrate the high levels of recognition necessary to show fame, summary judgement is appropriate on this claim • UT's dilution claim is dismissed but trademark infringement and unfair competition claims will go to trial
trade secret - Answer -A formula, device, idea, process, or other information used in a business that gives the owner a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
- to win misappropriated case plaintiff must prove that secret was trade secret, maintained reasonable measure to protect, that defendant improperly acquired or used
- protection technically lasts forever
Uniform Trade Secrets Act - Answer -Protects employers from having former employees take trade secrets to new employer
trademark - Answer -protect distinctive words, phrases, symbols, and devices adopted for purpose of identifying origin of goods and services available for sale
-short and simple words
- protectable types are suggestive, arbitrary or fanciful
Genericide - Answer -When a trademark becomes so well known that it becomes the generic term for a product, and trademark rights are lost
secondary meaning - Answer -A brand name that has evolved from an ordinary term.
-think michael dell
suggestive terms - Answer -Terms that suggest rather than describe a product automatically qualify for trademark protection. A suggestive term leaves something to the consumer's imagination
arbitrary terms - Answer -A term, name, symbol or other device that has no bearing on a particular good; automatically qualifies for trademark protection
-apple
fanciful - Answer -word that did not exist before company invented
Trademark Infringement: likely confusion - Answer -- plaintiff has burden of proving defendants use of trademark will produce buyer confusion -remedy if case is won by plaintiff is injunction and damages, can even recover infringers profit from selling goods
Trademark Infringement: anti dilution - Answer -FTDA- if its famors right can be asserted even when goods are not similar
*a mark not famous if it is just widely known in local geographic area or niche market
University of Texas v. KST Electric: Trademarks kst - Answer -• KST uses longhorn logo • Likelihood of confusion is probable b/c makes it seem as if KST is endorsed by UT • UT has niche fame • UT's evidence fails to demonstrate the high level of recognition to show fame under TDRA, summary judgement is appropriate on this claim UT's dilution claim is dismissed but trademark infringement and unfair competition will go to trial • UT has not created a genuine issue of material fact that the longhorn logo is a "household name" so b/c UT's evidence failts to demonstrate the high levels of recognition necessary to show fame, summary judgement is appropriate on this claim • UT's dilution claim is dismissed but trademark infringement and unfair competition claims will go to trial
trade secret - Answer -A formula, device, idea, process, or other information used in a business that gives the owner a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
- to win misappropriated case plaintiff must prove that secret was trade secret, maintained reasonable measure to protect, that defendant improperly acquired or used
- protection technically lasts forever
Uniform Trade Secrets Act - Answer -Protects employers from having former employees take trade secrets to new employer
