Strange Music, Inc. v. Strange Music, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “distinctiveness” under New York law is evaluated using the same factors that are employed when evaluating the strength of a mark under federal law
• finding that even marks that were orally identical were not similar because they did “not create the same overall impression” because “the fonts, colors and emblems [were] not alike
• \STRANGE MUSIC” and \sTRANGEmUSIC” marks created dissimilar \overall impressions” due to differences in \fonts, colors and emblems”
• no competitive proximity where plaintiffs’ CDs were sold primarily through its website, whereas defendants’ CDs were sold in traditional music stores and outlets
• \Evidence of a failure to discontinue [after receiving a cease and desist letter] does not per se establish defendants' bad faith.\
• no similarity where Defendant's mark is \almost always accompanied by\ a logo while plaintiff's mark \lacks an accompanying picture\ and \usually appears in a font that differs from defendants' font\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).