Thaddeus Davids Co. v. Davids Manufacturing Co.

Citations

• 233 U.S. 461
• 34 S. Ct. 648
• 58 L. Ed. 1046
• 1914 U.S. LEXIS 1226

Syllabus

<p>A trade-mark consisting of an ordinary surname is not the subject of exclusive appropriation as a common-law trade-mark, but may, under the fourth proviso of § 5 of the Trade-Mark Act of 1905, be validly régi'stered if in use'for ten years next preceding the passage of that act in the'manner specified therein.</p> <p>A proviso in a statute will not be so construed as to have little or nothing to afet upon arid to have no. reason'for its insertion.</p> <p>The fourth proviso of § 5 of the Trade-Mark. Act-of 1905 modifies the general limitations contained iri the second proviso of the same section against the use of personal and geographical names and terms descriptive of character and quality.</p> <p>In enacting the Trade-Mark Act of 1905 and inserting the provisos in § 5 thereof, Congress did not intend to provide for a barren notice of an' ineffectual claim, but to confer definite rights, and an applicant properly registering under the act becomes the owner of the trademark and entitled to be protected in its use as such.</p> <p>While a trade-mark consisting of a proper name may be registered under the fourth proviso of § 5 of the Trade-Mark Act of 1905, another who uses that name will not be regarded as infringing the trade-mark unless the name is so reproduced, copied or imitated as to mislead the public with respect to the origin or ownership of the goods.</p> <p>Improperly using a proper-name trade-mark registered under the fourth proviso of § 5 of the Trade-Mark Act of 1905 in such manner as to mislead the public ana uiereby constitute infringement is not merely unfair competition at common law, which would not give the Federal court jurisdiction unless diverse, citizenship existed, but is a violation of a Federal right and a Federal court has jurisdiction of an action based thereon.</p> <p>While in a case for unfair competition it may be necessary to show intent to deceive the public, in a case for violation of a properly registered trade-mark it is not nec