What Trademark Law Could Learn From Employment Law, 12 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. Rev. 118 (2012)

Kearney, Robert A.

Journal: UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Volume: 12

Year: 2012

Bluebook Citation: 12 J. MARSHALL. REV. INTELL. PROP. L. (2012)

Author: Robert A. Kearney: all 9 publications


Abstract

Trademark litigation is as unpredictable as it is expensive. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) considers as many as thirteen different factors when evaluating whether a trademark causes a “likelihood of confusion.” Federal courts use many of the same factors, though which factors are chosen differ by jurisdiction, and, do not necessarily overlap with the Board. Further, a party can litigate for a time before the Board, then in federal court, and then back before the Board. And, if this were not enough, the Board’s decisions have little if any preclusive effect on the court, and, a court’s decision is not necessarily binding on the Board.

The natural consequences of this chaos are forum shifting, highly unpredictable outcomes, and inflated costs of litigation. What trademark law needs is a framework to provide structure, guidance and expedience, and to eliminate redundancy. This is precisely what employment law is predicated on.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.