Boston Athletic Association v. Mark Sullivan, Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “declin[ing] to require [surveys] as the only way of proving” actual confusion
• guoting Kazmaier v. Wooten, 761 F.2d 46, 48-49 (1st Cir. 1985)
• finding “it fair to presume that purchasers are likely to be confused about the shirt’s source” because “defendants intentionally referred to the Boston Marathon on its shirts” and “purchasers were likely to buy the shirts precisely because of that reference”
• purchasers tried returning shirts bearing “Boston Marathon” moniker purchased from infringing party at official Boston Marathon booth and were confused as to why they were unable to do so
• BAA’s broad media exposure made it known to the public, which increased its strength
• “Defendants’ shirts are clearly designed to take advantage of the Boston Marathon and to benefit from the good will associated with its promotion by plaintiffs. Defendants thus obtain a ‘free ride’ at plaintiffs’ expense.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).