Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Trademarks And Human Rights: Oil And Water? Or Chocolate And Peanut Butter?, Megan M. Carpenter
Trademarks And Human Rights: Oil And Water? Or Chocolate And Peanut Butter?, Megan M. Carpenter
Law Faculty Scholarship
In recent years, there has been a growing discourse at the intersection of intellectual property and human rights, including whether or not individual intellectual property rights are, or can be, human rights. In 2007, this debate began to focus on the area of trademarks. That year, the European Court of Human Rights determined that it had jurisdiction over a trademark dispute, by virtue of the property rights provision found in Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights. This paper seeks to explore the connection between trademarks and human rights. The first part of the article …
Brand Spillovers, Eric Goldman
Brand Spillovers, Eric Goldman
Faculty Publications
This Article considers the spillover effects of trademarks - in particular, brand spillovers, which occur when consumer interest in a trademark increases the profits of third parties who do not own the trademark. Using techniques such as loss leaders and shelf space adjacency, retailers routinely create brand spillovers for their profit, and trademark law generally has not restricted these activities. Online intermediaries, such as search engines, also create and profit from brand spillovers by selling manufacturers' trademarks for advertising purposes (keyword triggering). However, in contrast to retailer practices, keyword triggering has sparked a heated and irresolute battle over its legitimacy …
Trademark Intersectionality , Sonia K. Katyal
Trademark Intersectionality , Sonia K. Katyal
Faculty Scholarship
Even though most scholars and judges treat intellectual property law as a predominantly content neutral phenomenon, trademark law contains a statutory provision, Section 2(a) that provides for the cancellation of marks that are “disparaging,” “immoral,” or “scandalous,” a provision that has raised intrinsically powerful constitutional concerns. The constitutional tensions surrounding Section 2(a), invariably, affect two central metaphors that are at war within trademark law: the marketplace of goods, which premises itself on the fixedness of intellectual properties, and the marketplace of ideas, which is premised on the very fluidity of language itself. Since the architecture of trademark law focuses only …