KudoZ home » English to German » Law: Patents, Trademarks, Copyright

nominative and classic fair use

German translation: s.u.

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
12:56 Feb 7, 2009
English to German translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law: Patents, Trademarks, Copyright / Markenrecht
English term or phrase: nominative and classic fair use
"Collecting cases discussing the Circuit's test for nominative fair use, disagreeing with the Ninth Circuit's distinction between *nominative and classic fair use* and adopting a likelihood of confusion text."

In diesem Ausschnitt des Textes geht es um Gerichtsentscheidungen in Fällen, die das Markenrecht und die Nutzung von Marken betreffen. Mein Problem ist eingesternt, denn leider habe ich hier bislang nicht differenzieren können... "nominative use" (auch "nominative fair use") verstehe ich als normalen Gebrauch/normale Nutzung.

Ausschnitt aus der US-Wikipedia:
"Nominative use may be considered to be either related to, or a type of "trademark fair use" (sometimes called "classic fair use" or "statutory fair use"). All "trademark fair use" doctrines, however classified, are distinct from the fair use doctrine in copyright law."
Jonas_Je
Local time: 23:52
German translation:s.u.
Explanation:
nominative fair use = berechtigter Markengebrauch zur Beschreibung der fremden/klägerischen Marke (bei vergleichender Werbung etc.)

classic fair use = berechtigter Markengebrauch zur Beschreibung der eigenen Marke (zur Beschreibung und Abgrenzung der eigenen produkte und Dienstleistungen)

Vgl. die Unterscheidung unten:

The Ninth Circuit recognizes two types of fair use: classic fair use and nominative fair use. [27] Classic fair use is where the defendant uses the plaintiff's mark to describe the defendant's mark. [28] Nominative fair use, by contrast, is where the defendant uses the plaintiff's mark to describe the plaintiff's mark. [29] The purpose of nominative fair use is "generally for the 'purposes of comparison, criticism or point of reference.'" [30] Nominative fair use was first recognized in New Kids on the Block v. New America Publishing, Inc., where the Ninth Circuit held that the defendants' use of the plaintiffs' trademarked band name, "New Kids on the Block," in their public opinion poll was nominative fair use. [31]

The distinction between classic and nominative fair use is important because each requires a different analysis and because "the classic fair use analysis only complements the likelihood of customer confusion analysis �." [32] By contrast, the nominative fair use analysis essentially replaces a likelihood of confusion analysis. [33] The nominative fair use analysis is appropriate "where a defendant has used the plaintiff's mark to describe the plaintiff's product, even if the defendant's ultimate goal is to describe his own product." [34] The three elements of "nominative fair use" are the following:
First, the [plaintiff's] product or service in question must be one not readily identifiable without use of the trademark; second, only so much of the mark or marks may be used as is reasonably necessary to identify the plaintiff's product or service; and third, the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the mark, suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder. [35]

Classic fair use, on the other hand, necessitates a different analysis. To assert a classic fair use defense, a defendant must prove the following: "[First], defendant's use of the term is not as a trademark or service mark; [second, the] defendant uses the term 'fairly and in good faith'; and [third, the defendant uses the term] 'only to describe' its goods or services." [36]

The defendant who successfully asserts a fair use defense may ultimately be allowed to use the mark, regardless of whether or not the defendant is a competitor of the plaintiff. As a result, the possibility of a likelihood of confusion between the two products exists. The federal circuits have split on how to resolve this problem.
Selected response from:

Andreas Pompl
Germany
Local time: 23:52
Grading comment
Ich kann mich Goldcoasters Lob nur anschließen, exzellent recherchiert und formuliert, der Terminus passt bei mir hundertprozentig. Vielen Dank!
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
4 +1s.u.
Andreas Pompl


  

Answers


15 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +1
s.u.


Explanation:
nominative fair use = berechtigter Markengebrauch zur Beschreibung der fremden/klägerischen Marke (bei vergleichender Werbung etc.)

classic fair use = berechtigter Markengebrauch zur Beschreibung der eigenen Marke (zur Beschreibung und Abgrenzung der eigenen produkte und Dienstleistungen)

Vgl. die Unterscheidung unten:

The Ninth Circuit recognizes two types of fair use: classic fair use and nominative fair use. [27] Classic fair use is where the defendant uses the plaintiff's mark to describe the defendant's mark. [28] Nominative fair use, by contrast, is where the defendant uses the plaintiff's mark to describe the plaintiff's mark. [29] The purpose of nominative fair use is "generally for the 'purposes of comparison, criticism or point of reference.'" [30] Nominative fair use was first recognized in New Kids on the Block v. New America Publishing, Inc., where the Ninth Circuit held that the defendants' use of the plaintiffs' trademarked band name, "New Kids on the Block," in their public opinion poll was nominative fair use. [31]

The distinction between classic and nominative fair use is important because each requires a different analysis and because "the classic fair use analysis only complements the likelihood of customer confusion analysis �." [32] By contrast, the nominative fair use analysis essentially replaces a likelihood of confusion analysis. [33] The nominative fair use analysis is appropriate "where a defendant has used the plaintiff's mark to describe the plaintiff's product, even if the defendant's ultimate goal is to describe his own product." [34] The three elements of "nominative fair use" are the following:
First, the [plaintiff's] product or service in question must be one not readily identifiable without use of the trademark; second, only so much of the mark or marks may be used as is reasonably necessary to identify the plaintiff's product or service; and third, the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the mark, suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder. [35]

Classic fair use, on the other hand, necessitates a different analysis. To assert a classic fair use defense, a defendant must prove the following: "[First], defendant's use of the term is not as a trademark or service mark; [second, the] defendant uses the term 'fairly and in good faith'; and [third, the defendant uses the term] 'only to describe' its goods or services." [36]

The defendant who successfully asserts a fair use defense may ultimately be allowed to use the mark, regardless of whether or not the defendant is a competitor of the plaintiff. As a result, the possibility of a likelihood of confusion between the two products exists. The federal circuits have split on how to resolve this problem.


    Reference: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/articles/conten...
Andreas Pompl
Germany
Local time: 23:52
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: German
PRO pts in category: 4
Grading comment
Ich kann mich Goldcoasters Lob nur anschließen, exzellent recherchiert und formuliert, der Terminus passt bei mir hundertprozentig. Vielen Dank!

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Goldcoaster: da hast Du Dir aber echt Mühe gegeben, die entsprechend belohnt sein will
3 hrs
  -> Danke!
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


Changes made by editors
Feb 11, 2013 - Changes made by Steffen Walter:
Field (specific)Law (general) » Law: Patents, Trademarks, Copyright


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search