ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Cogito Ergo Teneo; an intellectual property blawg

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Intellectual Property Law

: Cogito Ergo Teneo; an intellectual property blawg

Trademark Law: Colt v. Bush 051807

By Sean Fowler

ADVERTISEMENTS
Colt Defense v. Bushmaster Firearms, 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, NO. 06-1696 (May 18, 2007):

Issue:
Colt developed a more compact and lightweight M16 for the U.S. Military. In accordance with the U.S. military's naming conventions, the U.S. military called the gun "Model 4" or "M4" for short. Colt registered the trademark "M4." Years went by, and Colt competitors referred to guns of this type as M4s in their advertising. The media tended to use M4 as a descriptive noun to indicate this kind of gun. And consumers seeking to obtain such guns would refer to such guns as M4s. Bushmaster sells an allegedly "M4 type" gun. Colt sued Bushmaster and others for trademark infringement. In the lower court decision, the court found that the name was generic and not entitled to protection. Colt appealed.

Pertinent issue of trademark law:
1) Does a registered trademark defeat -- by virtue of its registration -- a claim of genericness?

Conclusion:
No. Registration of a trademark only creates a rebuttable presumption, not a dispositive answer. In light of the evidence showing genericness, the court affirmed the decision in favor of Bushmaster. Colt had presented a single military document wherein the military used the M4 name interchangeably with "Colt." However, as the military has an exclusive contract with Colt for M4s, the court found that this lone document was insufficient to surmount the evidence in favor of genericness. Colt also argued that the consuming public was simply confused when referring to M4s and was actually trying to invoke the name of Colt. The court found that requests by consumers to the Bushmaster site did not likely seek a Colt firearm when addressing Bushmaster. Genericness ruling affirmed.

Full post as published by Cogito Ergo Teneo; an intellectual property blawg on November 06, 2007 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0176 secs (new cache)