This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Intellectual Property

Apr. 18, 2000

Kids Stuff

THE ADVISER A design can't be protected as trade dress unless it has achieved secondary meaning. By Rod S. Berman and Steve Plotkin

By Rod S. Berman and Steve Plotkin
        On March 22, in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Samara Brothers Inc., 120 S.Ct. 1339 (2000), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a product's appearance or design cannot be protected as trade dress under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. Section 1125(a)) unless the appearance of the product has achieved so-called "secondary meaning"; that i...

To continue reading, please subscribe.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)