The IT Law Wiki
Explore
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Random page
TopContent
Most Visited Pages
Cell phone
RFID tag
Radio frequency spectrum
Cloud consumer
Internet
Newly Changed Pages
Computer terminal
Persuasive evidence
Website operator
Bfdi
Email bombing
Pornography
Message modification
Most Popular Pages
community
Community portal
forum
FANDOM
Fan Central
BETA
Games
Anime
Movies
TV
Video
Wikis
Explore Wikis
Community Central
Start a Wiki
Don't have an account?
Register
Sign In
Sign In
Register
The IT Law Wiki
34,539
pages
Explore
Main Page
All Pages
Community
Interactive Maps
Random page
TopContent
Most Visited Pages
Cell phone
RFID tag
Radio frequency spectrum
Cloud consumer
Internet
Newly Changed Pages
Computer terminal
Persuasive evidence
Website operator
Bfdi
Email bombing
Pornography
Message modification
Most Popular Pages
community
Community portal
forum
Editing
Nominative fair use
Back to page
Edit
Edit source
View history
Talk (0)
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.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Overview == === U.S. trademark law === Under the doctrine of '''nominative fair use,''' the defendant uses the plaintiff’s [[trademark]] to specifically identify the plaintiff for certain purposes — such as [[comparative advertising]] or [[advertising]] repair services or replacement parts for the plaintiff’s goods. <ref>"A defendant may use a plaintiff's trademark to identify the plaintiff's goods so long as there is no likelihood of confusion about the source of defendant's product or the mark-holder's sponsorship or affiliation. [[Merck v. Mediplan|Merck & Co. v. Mediplan Health Consulting, Inc.]], 425 F.Supp.2d 402, 413 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).</ref> The nominative fair use defense is appropriate "where a defendant has used the plaintiff's mark to describe the plaintiff's product, even if the defendant's ultimate goal is to describe his own product."<ref>Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139, 1151 (9th Cir. 2002).</ref> It “acknowledges that ‘it is often virtually impossible to refer to a particular product for purposes of comparison, criticism, point of reference or any other such purpose without using the mark.”<ref>Brother Records, Inc. v. Jardine, 318 F.3d 900, 908 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted).</ref> {{Quote|The court looks at three factors in determining whether a defendant is entitled to the nominative fair use defense (1) the product must not be readily identifiable without use of the [[mark]]; (2) only so much of the [[mark]] may be used as is reasonably necessary to identify the product; and (3) the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the [[mark]], suggest [[sponsorship]] or [[endorsement]] by the [[trademark holder]].<ref>[[Horphag Research v. Pellegrini|Horphag Res. Ltd. v. Pelligrini]], 337 F.3d 1036, 1041 (9th Cir. 2003).</ref>}} == References == <references /> [[Category:Trademark]]
Summary:
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)
Template used on this page:
Template:Quote
(
view source
)
Follow on IG
TikTok
Join Fan Lab