Aleck v. Washington

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that infringement laws “simply do not apply” to a “non-trademark use of a mark”
• holding that “[w]here ... the use [of a mark] does not imply sponsorship or endorsement, the fact that it is carried on for profit and in competition with the trademark holder’s business is beside the point” for purposes of trademark infringement
• discussing loss to social discoui’se if-speakers cannot make reference to a product by using its trademark
• stating “elements” of nominative fair use “defense” in terms of proof by defendant
• “While plaintiffs’ trademark certainly deserves protection ..., such protection does not extend to rendering newspaper articles, conversations, polls and comparative advertising impossible.”
• uses that do not serve to identify the source of a product do not imply endorsement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).