Skip to main content
· 1/12/1984

Wsm, Incorporated v. Dennis E. Hilton and Country Shindig Opry, Inc.

Citations

  • 724 F.2d 1320
  • 221 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 410
  • 14 Fed. R. Serv. 1491
  • 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26512

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that whether a mark is generic, descriptive, suggestive, arbitrary or fanciful is generally a factual issue
  • “Since ‘opry’ is not an arbitrary, coined or fanciful term, it is not a distinctive mark entitled to protection under the Missouri anti-dilution statute.”
  • “How a particular word has been used and how it has been understood by the public is a question of fact.”
  • “The correct categorization of a given term is also a factual issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gibson, Fagg, Woods

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.