Elgin National Watch Co. v. Illinois Watch Case Co.

Citations

• 179 U.S. 665
• 21 S. Ct. 270
• 45 L. Ed. 365
• 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1277

Syllabus

<p>The term trade mark means a distinctive mark of authenticity, through which the products of particular manufacturers or the vendible commodities of particular merchants may be distinguished from those of others.</p> <p>As its office is to point out distinctively the origin or ownership of the artides to which it is affixed, no sign or form of words can he appropriated as a valid trade mark, which from the fact conveyed by its primary meaning, others may employ with equal truth, and with equal right, for the same purpose.</p> <p>Words which are merely descriptive of the place where an article is manufactured cannot be monopolized as a trade mark, and this is true of the word “ Elgin ” as in controversy in this case.</p> <p>Where such a word has acquired a secondary signification in connection with its use, protection from imposition and fraud will be afforded by the courts, while at the same time it may not be susceptible of registration as a trade mark under the act of Congress of March 3, 1881.</p> <p>The parties to this suit being all citizens of the same State and the word in controversy being a geographical name, which could not be properly registered as a valid trade mark under the statute, the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction.</p> <p>In view of this conclusion and of the fact that the constitutionality of the act of Congress was not passed on by the court below, that subject is not considered.</p>