Trademark Fair-Use Analysis Hits Snag

At the center of the controversy is what is referred to as the trademark doctrine of 'fair use.' This phrase, borrowed from copyright law, refers to the defense that the use of certain words or phrases in a nonexploitative manner is protected against a charge of trademark infringement. The rationale for the defense is that certain words and phrases are, in their primary sense, 'descriptive' of some aspect of the product or service at issue, and therefore must remain available for competitive use, the thought being that such words may be necessary for competitors to accurately describe their own products and services. Thus, if one competitor is able to build trademark rights in a descriptive term (and this can be done, as discussed below), another, using the term in a non-trademark, merely descriptive manner, may have a complete defense to a charge of infringement.

Like all legal doctrines, trademark 'fair use' has experienced its judicial twists and turns. Since trademark law finds its roots in unfair-competition law, the collective of judicial opinions as to what is or isn't equitable in a specific case has led to a fairly tortured, not easily predictable, but always interesting body of law.