Talk:United States trademark law

sababaksdbsjssj##{}{{

Comments

There's an incredible lack of sourcing on this article, but specifically if anyone can find a source for the section that says "Failure to "police" a mark by stopping infringing uses can result in the loss of protection." I would be very grateful for it --148.100.153.116 (talk) 03:37, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Failure to police a mark does not necessarily result in the loss of protection. However, it does weaken the rightsholder's position over time. D could claim that P had "slept on their rights" and inexcusably delayed taking action, so D could make a case that the claim is barred based on laches. Alternatively, a mark may become generic if it begins to be used to describe the product rather than the source, and whether a rights holder vigorously polices its mark is informative on the matter. That's my theory on why Coca-Cola still has a TM even though "cola" has become a generic term for soda in a number of states. They're highly litigative. Arttechlaw (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I phone {}°π€{$¢°£

Fks()-३३({ ^$$$$°¢{i I phon e 49.15.242.99 (talk) 08:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)