LAWN MANAGERS V. PROGRESSIVE LAWN MANAGERS: CONFUSING CONSUMERS AND TANGLING TRADEMARK PRECEDENT

Volume 94, No. 2, Winter 2022

By Anna Johnson [PDF]

A company’s trademark can be its single greatest source of “intangible value.” From 2010 to 2019, over 38.7 million trademark applications were filed worldwide. The Coca-Cola Company expressed its first trademark in 18873 and owns trademarks to “Coca-Cola,” to the graphic representation of its name, and to its bottle shape. Trademarks serve two functions: (1) identifying and distinguishing one’s goods or services from those produced or sold by another, and (2) indicating the source of the goods or services. Alongside these two purposes, trademark law has two goals: (1) protect consumers from confusion and deception, and (2) protect a plaintiff’s infringed trademark as property.

Tags: case note, spotlight, TLR, trademark law, Vol. 94

By Fiona Burke, Temple Law Review Volume 96 Staff Editor Liberals have, as exit polls and Bernie Sanders point out, largely lost the working class and, in fact, most of America. There are many reasons for this, all of which have been dissected and analyzed ad nauseum in the past few weeks and likely will be for even years. One such […]

Author: Jasnoor Hundal In early August 2023, the Supreme Court stayed the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision, In re Purdue Pharma L.P., and granted certiorari to hear oral argument in December of 2023. The parties were asked to brief and argue “[w]hether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a […]

Randy Kominsky is a member of Temple Law’s Class of 1979. Mr. Kominsky was a staff editor for Volume 51 and an associate research editor for Volume 52 of Temple Law Review. His case note, Housing Discrimination – The Appropriate Evidentiary Standard for Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, was published in 1978.[1] After graduating, he moved […]