Law Commons^™

Op-Ed: Don’T Stop At Sopa, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Op-ed in Slate.com by Mark McKenna. SOPA and PIPA are (almost) dead? Now can we talk about the law that already exists?

"Kohler Co. Steamed Over Arizona Firm’S Name Salon School Makes Change To Avoid Trademark Suit" (Quotes: Mark P. Mckenna) Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Kohler Co. steamed over Arizona firm’s name Salon school makes change to avoid trademark suit by Rick Romell of the Journal Sentinel quotes Mark P. McKenna in Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Jan. 24, 2012.

People have no hard and fast right to use their name on their business if someone else already has trademarked it, said Durst and two academic experts - Mark McKenna of the University of Notre Dame Law School and J. Thomas McCarthy, senior professor at the University of San Francisco.

McKenna, however, called Kohler Co.'s assertions "a pretty aggressive use of their trademark rights."

He said …

Court: Reselling Books Bought Abroad Isn't A Copyright Violation - (Quotes: Mark Mckenna), Npr’S Morning Edition, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Court: Reselling Books Bought Abroad Isn't A Copyright Violation interview by Dan Bobkoff quotes Mark McKenna, NPR’s Morning Edition March 20, 2013 DAN BOBKOFF, BYLINE: Once you buy a book in the U.S., you're free to lend it, throw it away or sell it. This is called the First Sale Doctrine, says law professor Mark McKenna of Notre Dame. MARK MCKENNA: This is why there are used book stores. BOBKOFF: But the question at stake in this case was whether that still applies to products sold and made in another country. Grad student Supap(ph) Kirksang(ph) made tens of thousands of …

Mark Mckenna Quoted In Usa Today Article Apple Gets $290m In Samsung Patent Dispute, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Mark McKenna was quoted in the USA Today article Apple gets $290 million in Samsung patent dispute by Scott Martin. "Today's damage award was much larger than Samsung had argued for, but still significantly less than the $400 million vacated by Judge Koh after the first trial," said Mark McKenna, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame.

(Dys)Functionality, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

The functionality doctrine serves a unique role in trademark law: unlike virtually every other doctrine, functionality can trump consumer confusion (or so it seems, at least in mechanical-functionality cases). In this sense, functionality may be the only doctrine in trademark law that can truly be considered a defense. But despite its potential power, the functionality doctrine is quite inconsistently applied. This is true of mechanical functionality cases because courts differ over the extent to which the doctrine focuses on competitors’ right to copy unpatented features as opposed to their need to copy. And aesthetic functionality cases are even more scattered: …

Testing Modern Trademark Law's Theory Of Harm, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Modern scholarship takes a decidedly negative view of trademark law. Commentators rail against doctrinal innovations like dilution and initial interest confusion. They clamor for clearer and broader defenses. And they plead for greater First Amendment scrutiny of various applications of trademark law. But beneath all of this criticism lies overwhelming agreement that consumer confusion is harmful. This easy acceptance of the harmfulness of confusion is a problem because it operates at too high a level of generality, ignoring important differences between types of relationships about which consumers might be confused. Failure to differentiate between these different relationships has enabled trademark …

An Alternate Approach To Channeling?, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Intellectual property law has developed a variety of doctrines to police the boundaries between various forms of protection. Courts and scholars alike overwhelmingly conceive of these doctrines in terms of the nature of the objects of protection. The functionality doctrine in trademark law, for example, defines the boundary between trademark and patent law by identifying and refusing trademark protection to features that play a functional role in a product’s performance. Likewise, the useful article doctrine works at the boundary of copyright and patent law to identify elements of an article’s design that are dictated by function and to channel protection …

Teaching Trademark Theory Through The Lens Of Distinctiveness, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

This contribution to the annual teaching edition of the Saint Louis University Law Journal encourages teachers to begin trademark law courses using the concept of distinctiveness as a vehicle for articulating producer and consumer perspectives in trademark law. Viewing the law through these sometimes different perspectives helps in approaching a variety of doctrines in trademark law, and both perspectives are relatively easy to grasp in the context of distinctiveness.

Trademark Law's Faux Federalism, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Federal and state trademark laws regulate concurrently: The Lanham Act does not preempt state law, and in fact many states have statutorily and/or judicially developed trademark or unfair competition laws of their own. This state of affairs, which is now well-accepted even if it has not always been uncontroversial, distinguishes trademark law from patent and copyright law, since federal patent and copyright statutes preempt state law much more broadly. The Patent Act entirely preempts state law with respect to non-secret inventions and the 1976 Copyright Act preempts state copyright law with respect to all works fixed in a tangible medium …

Dastar's Next Stand, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

No abstract provided.

Intergenerational Progress, Brett Frischmann, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

This Essay prepared for the Wisconsin Law Review’s symposium on Intergenerational Equity lays the groundwork for a broader understanding of the goals of IP law in the United States by arguing that there is room for a normative commitment to intergenerational justice. First, we argue that the normative basis for IP laws need not be utilitarianism. The Constitution does not require that we conceive of IP in utilitarian terms or that we aim only to promote efficiency or maximize value. To the contrary, the IP Clause leaves open a number of ways to conceive of Progress; courts’ and scholars’ overwhelming …

What's The Frequency, Kenneth? Channeling Doctrines In Trademark Law, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

This paper was published as a chapter in Intellectual Property and Information Wealth (Peter Yu, ed., Praeger 2007). The chapter describes several doctrines that courts have developed to limit the scope of trademark protection where there is a risk of interference with the patent or copyright schemes. It also suggests that courts have in some cases overemphasized the subject matter of protection and underemphasized parties' ability to use trademark law to capture the types of economic benefits for which patent and copyright protection are presumed necessary.

An Alternative Approach To Channeling?, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Intellectual property law has developed a variety of doctrines to police the boundaries between various forms of protection. Courts and scholars alike overwhelmingly conceive of these doctrines in terms of the nature of the objects of protection. The functionality doctrine in trademark law, for example, defines the boundary between trademark and patent law by identifying and refusing trademark protection to features that play a functional role in a product's performance. Likewise, the useful article doctrine works at the boundary of copyright and patent law to identify elements of an article's design that are dictated by function and to channel protection …

Fixing Copyright In Three Impossible Steps: Review Of How To Fix Copyright By William Patry, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

This review of William Patry’s How to Fix Copyright highlights three of Patry's themes. First is Patry’s insistence that copyright policy be based on real-world evidence, a suggestion that should be uncontroversial but instead runs headlong into the near-religious commitments of copyright stakeholders. Second is Patry’s emphasis on the difference between the interests of creators, on the one hand, and owners of copyright interests, on the other. Third, and finally, is Patry’s focus on the copyright system’s strong tendency to entrench business models and resist change, particularly in the face of new technology.

The Rehnquist Court And The Groundwork For Greater First Amendment Scrutiny Of Intellectual Property, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

This contribution to the Washington University School of Law conference on the Rehnquist Court and the First Amendment addresses the Rehnquist Court's view of the role of the First Amendment in intellectual property cases. It argues that, while the Rehnquist Court was not eager to find a conflict between intellectual property laws and the First Amendment, there is reason to believe that it set the stage for greater First Amendment scrutiny of intellectual property protections. At the very least, the Court left that road open to future courts, which might be inclined to view intellectual property more skeptically.

Intellectual Property, Privatization And Democracy: A Response To Professor Rose, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

No abstract provided.

The Right Of Publicity And Autonomous Self-Definition, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

Legal protection against unauthorized commercial uses of an individual's identity has grown significantly over the last fifty years as it has relentlessly pursued economic value. It was forced to focus on value because a false distinction between the harms suffered by private citizens and celebrities seemingly left celebrities without a privacy claim for commercial use of their identities. But the normative case for awarding individuals the economic value of their identity is weak, since celebrities do not need additional incentive to invest in either their native skill or in developing a persona. Still, while the prevailing justification is inadequate, as …

Symposium: Creativity And The Law: Introduction, Mark P. Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

No abstract provided.

Is Pepsi Really A Substitute For Coke? Market Definition In Antitrust And Ip, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

No abstract provided.

Probabilistic Knowledge Of Third-Party Trademark Infringement, Mark Mckenna

Mark P. McKenna

No abstract provided.