Fuji Photo Film Company, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Shinohara Shoji Kabushiki Kaisha and Graphic MacHinery International, Inc., Cross-Appellants

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that intent is immaterial when the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant acted in good faith
• holding that intent is immaterial when the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant acted in good faith
• holding that “FUJI” mark was arbitrary as applied to graphic arts material
• explaining that the Lanham Act’s prohibition of trademark infringement “clearly encompasses confusion on the part of purchasers of either (or both) party’s products”
• stating that the simplicity and negligible cost of Fuji’s goods and its extensive advertising increased the likelihood of confusion about the source of the goods
• explaining that, even though consumers of printing presses were sophisticated and did not buy on impulse, those factors were not determinative

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).