Question: Question 3 4 1 pts 3 4 . In class, Professor Stafford presented an image of the Starbuds logo and posed a question to the
Question
pts
In class, Professor Stafford presented an image of the Starbuds logo and posed a question to the class along the lines of the following: If you were legal counsel for Starbucks, would you recommend your company sue Starbuds, alleging trademark dilution?" Which of the following is false regarding this situation and dilution in general?
Starbucks is a famous mark and Starbuds attempted to capitalize on the familianity of the Starbucks mark.
Starbucks would fikely lose in a lawsuit against Starbuds because Starbuds does not compete for business with Starbucks.
The original version of the Lanham Act of was enacted to protect companies from losing business to rival companies that use confusingly similar trademarks.
The Lanham Act of was amended by passage of the Federal Trademark Dilution Act to allow trademark owners to bring a lawsuit in federal court for trademark dilution.
Starbucks would likely win in a lawsuit against Starbuds because it is unnecessary to show that Starbuds competes in the same market as Starbucks.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
1 Expert Approved Answer
Step: 1 Unlock
Question Has Been Solved by an Expert!
Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts
Step: 2 Unlock
Step: 3 Unlock
