Re: Trademark dilution

Dear Bob Cumbow & other Cni-Copyright members:

I agree with Bob that parody/satire essentially involves First Amendment issues, but I wish to correct what may be a misimplication inherent in Bob's message (response to a prior query) that there are no precedent for satire/parody defenses to dilution claims. While there may not yet be a case involving a dilution claim under the recent amendment to the Lanham Act, sec. 43a (federal anti-dilution statutory cause of action) that upholds a parody/satire defense with or w/o reference to or an express reliance on one or more of the three enumerated statutory exceptions to a claim for dilution, state law, including that of Calif. & New York , is replete with judicial decisions involving parody/satire defenses to trademark/business name dilution claims, whether under state statutes and/or the common law.

For anyone who wishes to discuss this in more detail or who is interested in particular cases, feel free to contact me. I also suggest that you look at the dilution chapter (section?) in McCarthy's treatise on Trademarks & Unfair Competition.

Barbara Brudno, Esq.
Law Offices of Barbara Brudno
8380 Waring Avenue, Ste. 204
(310) 550-8035 // (310) 550-7246 (fax)
E-mail = BBIPLaw[_at_]AOL.Com
http://www.wld.com/lawyer/barbara.brudno Received on Sat Mar 14 1998 - 01:36:29 GMT