Yissum Research Development Co. v. Sony Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that plaintiffs use of a mark was not exclusive where a trademark search for the word “bling” revealed more than 160 hits
• finding that this factor weighed against a ■ finding of secondary meaning where there was little to no evidence of unsolicited media coverage
• finding that an inability to provide documentation of sales or transactions or of widespread advertising precluded a finding of use in commerce
• finding that the similarity was low, despite both marks using term “bling” and depicting diamonds, because defendants’ mark included other terms and depictions, resulting in a “different general impression” to the public
• finding limited advertising and promotion “was not sufficiently widespread or intensive to establish ‘use in commerce’ under the Lanham Act”
• finding that even in circumstances in which “the plaintiff's mark is relatively strong conceptually, [but] the secondary meaning factors weigh heavily against the plaintiff with respect to distinctiveness in the marketplace . . . this Polaroid factor is at best neutral for the plaintiff”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).