Please watch the webinar:

“TRADEMARK DILUTION,” available at ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKwXsJgwONY The film is approximately 30 minutes in length.

1. Does the owner of a famous trademark have to prove economic harm of its mark prior to filing a dilution cause of action? What section of the Lanham Act specifically addresses this question?
2. What kind of evidence does the modern trademark owner normally submit to the court in order to prove that its mark has achieved fame?
3. How specifically did the 2006 Trademark Dilution Revision Act change the Lanham Act with respect to a dilution cause of action?
4. Do you agree with the 2011 Starbucks court’s decision on remand that there was only a “loose connection” between the defendant’s mark CHARBUCKS and the plaintiff’s mark STARBUCKS, despite evidence of the defendant’s bad intent? Why or why not?
5. Do you think the plaintiff’s design mark used on its jeans in Levi Strauss v. Abercrombie Fitch is distinctive pursuant to Section 45 of the Lanham Act? Why or why not?
6. Do you think that the defendant in Harris Research, Inc. v. Lydon has a valid defense that its CHEM WHO? mark is a parody? Why or why not?

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.