Tenth Circuit: No trademark infringement, unfair competition, or cybersquatting by parody sites

In a decision last week, the Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment finding no trademark infringement, no unfair competition, and no cybersquatting. 

The district court held, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed, that none of the three elements of a trademark infringement action was proven, namely that the mark was not protectable, the defendant's use was not in connection with goods or serivces, and that the successful parody showed there was no likely confusion.  On the cybersquatting claim, the district court held, and the Tenth Circuit also affirmed, that the mark was not shown to be protectable (as with the trademark claim), and there was no bad faith.  As a result, the district court's summary judgment was affirmed in all respects.

More detail on Utah Lighthouse Ministry v. Found. for Apologetic Info. & Research after the jump.


Fourth Circuit: Chewy Vuiton not likely to be confused with or dilute Louis Vuitton trademarks

The Fourth Circuit Tuesday affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment of no trademark infringement or dilution.  At issue were dog toys that parodied the trademarks and trade dress of Louis Vuitton.  The Fourth Circuit agreed that the successful parody resulted in no trademark infringement.  On the trademark dilution claim, the court rejected the lower court's reasoning because the district court failed to fully apply the relevant dilution factors, but reached the same conclusion that there was no likely dilution.

More detail of Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC after the jump.


BlogCFC was created by Raymond Camden. This blog is running version 5.8.001.