Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006
(c) Dilution by Blurring; Dilution by Tarnishment-
(1) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF- Subject to the principles of equity, the owner
of a famous mark that is distinctive, inherently or through acquired
distinctiveness, shall be entitled to an injunction against another
person who, at any time after the owner's mark has become famous,
commences use of a mark or trade name in commerce that is likely to
cause dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment of the famous
mark, regardless of the presence or absence of actual or likely
confusion, of competition, or of actual economic injury.
(2) DEFINITIONS- (A) For purposes of paragraph (1), a mark is famous if
it is widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United
States as a designation of source of the goods or services of the
mark's owner. In determining whether a mark possesses the requisite
degree of recognition, the court may consider all relevant factors,
including the following:
(i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and
publicity of the mark, whether advertised or publicized by the owner or
third parties.
(ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or
services offered under the mark.
(iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
(iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or
the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register.
(B) For purposes of paragraph (1), `dilution by blurring' is
association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade name
and a famous mark that impairs the distinctiveness of the famous mark.
In determining whether a mark or trade name is likely to cause dilution
by blurring, the court may consider all relevant factors, including the
following:
(i) The degree of similarity between the mark or trade name and the
famous mark.
(ii) The degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of the famous
mark.
(iii) The extent to which the owner of the famous mark is engaging in
substantially exclusive use of the mark.
(iv) The degree of recognition of the famous mark.
(v) Whether the user of the mark or trade name intended to create an
association with the famous mark.
(vi) Any actual association between the mark or trade name and the
famous mark.
(C) For purposes of paragraph (1), `dilution by tarnishment' is
association arising from the similarity between a mark or trade name
and a famous mark that harms the reputation of the famous mark.
(3) EXCLUSIONS- The following shall not be actionable as dilution by
blurring or dilution by tarnishment under this subsection:
(A) Any fair use, including a nominative or descriptive fair use, or
facilitation of such fair use, of a famous mark by another person other
than as a designation of source for the person's own goods or services,
including use in connection with--
(i) advertising or promotion that permits consumers to compare goods or
services; or
(ii) identifying and parodying, criticizing, or commenting upon the
famous mark owner or the goods or services of the famous mark owner.
(B) All forms of news reporting and news commentary.
(C) Any noncommercial use of a mark.
(4) BURDEN OF PROOF- In a civil action for trade dress dilution under
this Act for trade dress not registered on the principal register, the
person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving
that--
(A) the claimed trade dress, taken as a whole, is not functional and is
famous; and
(B) if the claimed trade dress includes any mark or marks registered on
the principal register, the unregistered matter, taken as a whole, is
famous separate and apart from any fame of such registered marks.
(5) ADDITIONAL REMEDIES- In an action brought under this subsection,
the owner of the famous mark shall be entitled to injunctive relief as
set forth in section 34. The owner of the famous mark shall also be
entitled to the remedies set forth in sections 35(a) and 36, subject to
the discretion of the court and the principles of equity if--
(A) the mark or trade name that is likely to cause dilution by blurring
or dilution by tarnishment was first used in commerce by the person
against whom the injunction is sought after the date of enactment of
the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006; and
(B) in a claim arising under this subsection--
(i) by reason of dilution by blurring, the person against whom the
injunction is sought willfully intended to trade on the recognition of
the famous mark; or
(ii) by reason of dilution by tarnishment, the person against whom the
injunction is sought willfully intended to harm the reputation of the
famous mark.
(6) OWNERSHIP OF VALID REGISTRATION A COMPLETE BAR TO ACTION- The
ownership by a person of a valid registration under the Act of March 3,
1881, or the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register
under this Act shall be a complete bar to an action against that
person, with respect to that mark, that--
(A)(i) is brought by another person under the common law or a statute
of a State; and
(ii) seeks to prevent dilution by blurring or dilution by tarnishment;
or
(B) asserts any claim of actual or likely damage or harm to the
distinctiveness or reputation of a mark, label, or form of
advertisement.