Abstract
In Mosely v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that unless a plaintiff can prove damage, a trademark dilution case under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act will fail. Mental association of "Victor's Little Secret" with "Victoria's Secret" does not necessarily mean blurring or tarnishing of the plaintiff's trademark or trade name. The case continues the Court's acceptance of puckish creativity, but while the Court appears to be granting greater freedom to commercial speech, some legal restraints remain untouched. This article examines the Court's decision, applies it to other cases and attempts a synthesis of law. It argues that the uncertain standards of the FTDA created a chilling effect that the Court has decried in other areas of law. The article then examines how outcomes might have been different under the Moseley standards and what legal freedoms and restraints remain the same after Moseley.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
