Exxon Corporation v. Oxxford Clothes, Inc. And Oxxford Clothes Xx, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the defendant’s argument that “phaseout” agreements between the plaintiff an other infringers constituted naked licenses
• noting that twenty-six states have anti-dilution statutes
• Blurring is “a diminution in the uniqueness and individuality of the mark.”
• “Determining whether or not a particular agreement risks the possibility of allowing an infringing use of the mark, ie., a use that creates a likelihood of .consumer confusion, is, like the entirety of [the defendant’s] abandonment claim, ordinarily a factual inquiry.”
• “The naked licensing defense has traditionally been used in the context of infringement claims brought by the trademark owner.... ”
• “A license to use a mark is a transfer of limited rights, less than the whole interest which might have been transferred.” (emphases added; internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).