• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of internet law >DE MINIMIS CONFUSION ON THE INTERNET: COMPOUNDING THE ERROR OF INITIAL INTEREST
【24h】

DE MINIMIS CONFUSION ON THE INTERNET: COMPOUNDING THE ERROR OF INITIAL INTEREST

机译：Internet上的DE MINIMIS混淆：解决初始兴趣的错误

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

At an earlier stage in the development of trademark law, courts recognized the "ancient" rule that, to find an infringement, content, not merely labels, must be evaluated to determine the likelihood of confusion vel non. Thus, in Stop the Olympic Prison v. United States Olympic Commission, the court ruled that, notwithstanding the legitimate trademark rights of the US Olympic Committee in the word "Olympics," there was no likelihood of confusion resulting from the use of the word in the name of a group formed to protest the construction of a vast Olympic Village in upper New York state. Similarly, in Girl Scouts v. Personality Posters Mfg. Co., the Southern District of New York rejected the suggestion that there could possibly be any actionable confusion of the sort sufficient to suggest to a consumer, endorsement, or affiliation by the Girl Scouts arising from the publication and sale of a poster featuring a pregnant young girl scout. As the court explained, far from tending to prove confusion, the swift reporting to plaintiff by offended viewers of the "offending" use actually negated the suggestion of confusion: "[I]ndignation is not confusion. To the contrary, the indignation of those who [reported the offending use] would appear to make it clear that they feel that the Girl Scouts are being unfairly put upon, not that the Girl Scouts are the manufacturers or distributors of the object of indignation."
机译：在商标法发展的早期阶段，法院承认“古代”规则，即要发现侵权，必须对内容（而不仅仅是标签）进行评估，以确定混淆的可能性。因此，在“停止奥林匹克监狱诉美国奥林匹克委员会”一案中，法院裁定，尽管美国奥林匹克委员会在“奥林匹克”一词中拥有合法的商标权，但在“奥林匹克”一词中使用该词不会造成混淆为抗议在纽约州上州建造一个巨大的奥运村而成立的一个团体的名称。同样，在“女童军”诉“个性海报制造公司”中，纽约南区也拒绝了这样的建议，即可能存在任何足以使消费者暗示，认可或隶属于女童军的可操作性混淆来自出版和销售海报的特色怀孕的年轻女童子军。正如法院解释的那样，冒犯性的观看者迅速向原告报告“冒犯性”行为实际上并没有消除混淆的暗示：“尊严不是混淆。相反，对那些人的愤慨[报告了违法用途]的人似乎清楚地表明，他们认为女童子军受到不公平的对待，而不是女童子军是愤慨对象的制造商或分销商。”

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号