[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Did shhIT read this sentence? What? To begin with, the definition of being engaged in commerce, not "interstate commerce" as claimed, obviously unknown to shhIT, is the selling or offering to sell something or the offering or providing of a service. The fact that Re-Bath is engaged in "interstate" commerce has no bearing on what Tabberone does or does not do.

The Lanham Act refers to the use of the other company's logo, in commerce, to sell or offer for sale, a product in a manner intended to deceive consumers as to the source of the product. Since Tabberone is not selling any Re-Bath products, and the use of the Re-Bath name and logo is in a wholly editorial manner, is and always has been, considered protected speech under the First Amendment and the Lanham Act. Something shhIT would know had he/she even bothered to read what was said or the law.

We quoted the Lanham Act:

"Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word,..."
What part of "in connection with any goods or services" does shhIT not understand? Apparently, all of it. We are not engaged in commerce. And please, cite these "innumerable court decisions" to which you refer but give no information.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]