Tabberone is pronounced tab ber won not tay ber own

Tabbers Temptations     www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/ Home | Site Index | Disclaimer | Email Me! "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke

WCVB-TV v. Boston Athletic Association, 926 F.2d 42 (1st Cir, 1991): PLAINTIFF: broadcast the event without licensing, and used the words "Boston Marathon" on the screen in large letters before, during, and after the event. DEFENDANT : The Boston Athletic Association ("BAA"), registered the words "Boston Marathon" as a trade, or service mark and had licensed the broadcast of the event to another TV station. As a general matter, the law sometimes protects investors from the "free riding" of others; and sometimes it does not. The trademark statute does not give the appellants any "property right" in their mark except "the right to prevent confusion." There is no persuasive evidence of any intent to use the words "Boston Marathon" to suggest official sponsorship of Channel 5's broadcasts. Indeed, one would ordinarily believe that television viewers (unlike sports fans who might want to buy an official t-shirt with the name of a favorite event, team or player) wish to see the event and do not particularly care about the relation of station to event-promoter. See AMF, Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341, 353 (9th Cir.1979) (when deciding whether there is confusion "the wholly indifferent [consumers] may be excluded") (cites omitted); 2 J. McCarthy Sec. 23.27 at 129 & n. 20 (trademark law does not "protect those buyers who ... [are] 'indifferent' " to the mark). Common sense suggests (consistent with the record here) that a viewer who sees those words flash upon the screen will believe simply that Channel 5 will show, or is showing, or has shown, the marathon, not that Channel 5 has some special approval from the BAA to do so. In technical trademark jargon, the use of words for descriptive purposes is called a "fair use," and the law usually permits it even if the words themselves also constitute a trademark. See 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1115(b)(4) (statutory fair use defense). Court of Appeals confirmed the district court's ruling saying The dispositive legal issue concerns "customer confusion."