Slike strani
PDF
ePub

THE

BUSINESS LAW

JOURNAL

JOHN EDSON BRADY

EDITOR

Volume V
January-June, 1925

THE BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL COMPANY

71-73 MURRAY STREET

NEW YORK CITY

5 1973

Copyright, 1925, by

THE BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL COMPANY

The Business Law Journal

VOL. 5

JOHN EDSON BRADY, Editor

JANUARY, 1925

No. 1

A

The "Winchester" Trade-Mark Case

GOOD trade-mark is frequently one of the most valuable assets of a manufacturing concern. In many instances, to deprive a manufacturer of his trade-mark would be a serious handicap, to say the least.

To be of value to its owner, a trade-mark must be the kind of a trade-mark which the courts will protect against all encroachments. And yet it is not unusual to see a trade-mark, arbitrarily selected with no thought as to its validity, built up through a period of years at a great expenditure of money and effort and, in the end, declared invalid as a trade-mark and, therefore, not entitled to the protection of the courts.

As a general proposition, geographical names, such as "Boston,” "California," and "American" and the names of individuals, are not valid trade-marks and cannot be monopolized. Such marks, when fairly and honestly used, are open to all.

In a recent decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals (New York), Charles Broadway Rouss, Inc., v. Winchester Co., 300 Fed. Rep. 706, is found an interesting illustration of these principles of trade-mark law.

In this litigation, two reputable business corporations, known throughout the United States, and other countries as well, for the quality of their respective products, fought out in the Federal Courts the right to the exclusive use of the word "Winchester” as a trade-mark for shirts and other articles of apparel.

Each had adopted and used this mark in good faith and without knowledge that the same mark was being used on goods of the same character by the other. Each undoubtedly believed itself to be the exclusive owner of the mark. Between the two, many millions of dollars were spent over a long period of years in making the name known to the world. And now the court holds that the word "Winchester" is not capable of exclusive appropriation as a trademark.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »