lenb
arbitrary mark - ✔️✔️words that have some dictionary meaning before being adopted
as trademarks, but have no relationship to the product/service. "Apple"
Pierson vs. Post (1805) - ✔️✔️Post is hunting for a fox, chases it all day long until they
tire it out. Finally, when it's cornered, his neighbor Pierson hops out of the grass and
shoots the fox and claims the fox. Pierson wins since he has proof he killed the fox.
Pursuit and wounding is not enough in common law
brand dilution - ✔️✔️you're diluting their brand by using it to do your business, which
isn't up to par with that company's standards. You're lowering the quality of the brand a
company worked hard to make.
This works best if you are a famous brand or a super brand
real property - ✔️✔️not as important as intellectual property in today's world
property law - ✔️✔️you have exclusive use to something
ownership - ✔️✔️there was a transfer of rights (legally)
who gets the rights to property? - ✔️✔️transfer of rights, conquests, "first in time,"
"highest and best use"
highest and best use - ✔️✔️basis for eminent domain
Johnson vs. McIntosh - ✔️✔️supreme court case (with John Marshall) where only
white christian males can discover land. Still in place today called discovery
Swift vs. Gifford (1874) - ✔️✔️Swift vs. Gifford (1874 Mass)- Gifford hunting whales,
catches one with his harpoon, trying to tire it out, then Swift comes along and throws his
harpoon into it, and he wins the battle over the whale. Gifford had a physical connection
to the whale, but pursuit and wounding is not enough. Brought in experts and they
decided that the "first iron holds the whale" if your line holds, thats your whale
Glen vs. Rich (1881) - ✔️✔️Early examples of a trademark
trademark law - ✔️✔️any unique identifier, such as company symbols, words, sounds
that last forever
arbitrary mark - ✔️✔️words that have some dictionary meaning before being adopted
as trademarks, but have no relationship to the product/service. "Apple"
Pierson vs. Post (1805) - ✔️✔️Post is hunting for a fox, chases it all day long until they
tire it out. Finally, when it's cornered, his neighbor Pierson hops out of the grass and
shoots the fox and claims the fox. Pierson wins since he has proof he killed the fox.
Pursuit and wounding is not enough in common law
brand dilution - ✔️✔️you're diluting their brand by using it to do your business, which
isn't up to par with that company's standards. You're lowering the quality of the brand a
company worked hard to make.
This works best if you are a famous brand or a super brand
real property - ✔️✔️not as important as intellectual property in today's world
property law - ✔️✔️you have exclusive use to something
ownership - ✔️✔️there was a transfer of rights (legally)
who gets the rights to property? - ✔️✔️transfer of rights, conquests, "first in time,"
"highest and best use"
highest and best use - ✔️✔️basis for eminent domain
Johnson vs. McIntosh - ✔️✔️supreme court case (with John Marshall) where only
white christian males can discover land. Still in place today called discovery
Swift vs. Gifford (1874) - ✔️✔️Swift vs. Gifford (1874 Mass)- Gifford hunting whales,
catches one with his harpoon, trying to tire it out, then Swift comes along and throws his
harpoon into it, and he wins the battle over the whale. Gifford had a physical connection
to the whale, but pursuit and wounding is not enough. Brought in experts and they
decided that the "first iron holds the whale" if your line holds, thats your whale
Glen vs. Rich (1881) - ✔️✔️Early examples of a trademark
trademark law - ✔️✔️any unique identifier, such as company symbols, words, sounds
that last forever
