"Curtin argued that the proposed mark is descriptive and generic, and fails to function as a trademark because Rapunzel is the name of a fairy-tale character known in various forms for hundreds of years."
"The Court declined to review the CAFC's holding that a consumer lacks the statutory entitlement to oppose a trademark registration under 15 U.S.C. § 1063 because such consumer interests fall outside the commercial zone of interests protected by the Lanham Act."
"No company should ever be able to be the only company that can call their doll Rapunzel, because Rapunzel is already in the public domain."
The U.S. Supreme Court denied Rebecca Curtin's petition to oppose the trademark registration for 'RAPUNZEL' for dolls and toy figures. The Court upheld the CAFC's ruling that consumers lack the statutory right to challenge trademark registrations under 15 U.S.C. § 1063. Curtin argued that 'RAPUNZEL' is descriptive and generic, asserting it should remain in the public domain. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board initially allowed her opposition but later focused on her entitlement to oppose, ultimately siding with the trademark holder.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]