Now, I said "interesting," but I'm not so sure how much I love that formulation. (See how soft?)
"Likelihood of confusion" is the standard courts use to decide claims of trademark infringement as well as a fair description of the state of intellectual property, and discussions about it, in the 21st century.
Friday, May 20, 2005
Fairness, Confusion Inversely Proportional
The Appellate Law & Practice blog wantonly beckons me via a gratuitous link to here (thanks!), in its discussion of a new Ninth Circuit opinion in the KP Permanent Makeup case -- the decision, having bounced back from the Supreme Court, now being reversed by the Circuit. The Anonymous Appealler focuses, in part, on the Circuit's suggestion that "likelihood of confusion is inversely proportional to fair use". That's certainly an interesting way to look at it, though as a "soft IP" man ("soft" modifying "IP," not "man") any time I hear terms like "inversely proportional" I reach for my revolver. Here are the marks, by the way, courtesy of the Ninth Circuit:
No comments:
Post a Comment