In Re Chippendales Usa, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that whether the trade dress was “a common basic shape or design” was “inappli- cable” because “there has been no showing that the [trade dress] is common generally”
• finding Chippendales’s “Cuffs & Collar” costume to be a “mere refinement” of the “pervasive Playboy mark, which includes the cuffs and collar together with bunny ears”
• because other providers of erotic dancing entertainment services featured performers wearing cuffs and collars, similar cuff and collars were not inherently distinctive for such services
• “A mark’s strength is measured both by its conceptual strength (dis- tinctiveness) and its marketplace strength (secondary meaning).”
• “A mark’s strength is measured both by its conceptual strength (distinctiveness) and its marketplace strength (secondary meaning).”
• “A mark’s strength is measured both by its conceptual strength … and its marketplace strength ….”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).