In its 9-0 decision on the five-year-old dispute, the Supreme
Court ruled that the Federal Trademark Dilution Act requires
evidence that a competitor caused actual harm by using a
"sound-alike" or "knockoff name." The mere likelihood of economic
harm if the shop kept its name was deemed insufficient.
The sex toy and adult video shop of Victor and Cathy Moseley was
originally called "Victor's Secret". When the 750-store lingerie
chain threatened to sue, the Moseley's changed their sign to read
"Victor's Little Secret". But this was not enough to satisfy
Victoria's Secret and a lawsuit was filed.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that use of the name
"neither confused any customers or potential customers, nor was
likely to do so."
The Act that was the subject of this case is often used in US
domain name disputes. CNet News.com quotes Paul Levy, a lawyer with
the group Public Citizen, who observes that the ruling emphasises
that infringement is about the interests of consumers, not just
protection of companies. Accordingly, argues Levy, the rights to
use domain names that incorporate the trade marks of third parties
could be extended by yesterday's ruling.
The court's judgment can be downloaded as a 21-page PDF
from:
www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/01-1015.pdf
