Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., was the first to market a multifunction pocket tool, which it sold under the name “Pocket Survival Tool” (PST). Cooper Industries, Inc., became aware of the PST and its market success. It admittedly copied the PST “almost exactly” and came out with a multipurpose tool, called the Toolzall that differed in appearance from the PST in only three respects:
(1) It was marked with a different name than the PST;
(2) It had different fasteners than those used on the PST; and
(3) It had a serrated blade, which the PST did not.
Leatherman filed suit and obtained a preliminary injunction prohibiting Cooper from marketing the Toolzall on the grounds that the overall appearance of the PST was protected trade dress. At trial, the jury found that Cooper had infringed on Leatherman’s protected trade dress, and the court issued a permanent injunction prohibiting Cooper from marketing the original Toolzall. Cooper appealed. What legal rules should the court apply in evaluating this appeal?