T & T Manufacturing Co. v. A. T. Cross Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that permitting a junior user to appropriate a senior user’s established mark merely by adding a house mark “would make a mockery of trademark law”
• \a trademark protects two different interests: a business' interest in its good will and the public interest in obtaining the quality of goods which it associates with a particular mark\
• no significant harm to public caused by confusion between pens, “even though a consumer might claim harm because he sought the prestige of Cross but got Quill instead”
• in considering whether or not to enforce a contract, a court “should be careful not to afford a business more protection for its interests than it sought through contract”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).