Tcpip Holding Company, Inc. v. Haar Communications Inc., and Richard S. Haar

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that TCPIP failed to establish that “Children’s Place” was a famous mark despite its use in connection with 228 retail stores in twenty-seven states generating sales in 1999 of $280 million
• finding that the fair use doctrine did not protect defendant where defendant’s use of “thechildrensplace.com” was use “as a mark”
• noting that trademark law “ ‘helps assure a producer that it will reap the financial, reputation-related rewards associated with a desirable product’ ”
• noting that consumers are unlikely to assume that crunchy candy bars marketed under the descriptive marks “CRUN-CHIES” and “CRUNCHY” derive from the same source because confectioners are likely to select “names that describe and vaunt the crunchy texture of their products”
• finding that the plaintiff did not demonstrate fame where the plaintiff operated 228 retail stores in twenty-seven states, spent tens of millions of dollars advertising its mark in the past decade, and achieved sales in 1998 of $280 million
• enjoining use of some allegedly infringing domain names but allowing defendant to continue using others

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).