Anti-Dilution Law

Sportslaw Jargon: Anti-Dilution Law

An Anti-Dilution law protects against the "whittling away" or "diminishment" of a trademark's value by use of the mark in ways not authorized by the trademark owner, even though there is no likelihood of confusion by the unauthorized use. Anti-Dilution laws are distinguishable from traditional trademark infringement, which requires that a trademark holder prove a likelihood of confusion pertaining to the source of the goods amongst the general public because the marks are similar. [click here]

Dilution of a mark generally occurs in the form of "tarnishment" and/or "blurring." Tarnishment is when the use of the mark tarnishes, degrades, or brings embarrassment to the distinctive quality of the trademark. An example of tarnishment would be when inferior goods or services use the same or similar trademark to identify its goods and services. Blurring may occur through the use of the same or similar mark on competing and or non-competing goods and services. Therefore the unique and distinctive character of the trademark is weakened because consumers no longer associate the trademark with its original owner. An example of blurring would be when a sport internship site or a sports magazine uses the same or similar trademark of a professional sports league or team as its trademark. Or, if someone decided to use the name "Caandyland" as a pornographic site, which dilutes the reputation of the trademark "Candyland" (a popular child's game.)

In order to have a successful claim under the Anti-Dilution law the plaintiff must establish that its trademark is famous the defendant's use began after the plaintiff's mark became famous. The United States passed such a law in 1996 and is found in 15 USC sec. 1125.

Douglas Brown