I have to learn a whole lot of corporations law before I get around to studying for my trademark exam, but here are two fact patterns that raise issues of trademark fair use:
1. Anti-advertising activists release a sneaker called the “blackSpot”
in order to raise awareness of Nike’s use of sweatshop labor and offer an alternative made by fairly-paid, unionized workers.
They plan to use this “subvertising campaign” to promote the sneakers:
phil knight had a dream. he’d sell shows. he’d sell dreams he’d get rich. he’d use sweatshops if he had to.
then along came a new shoe. plan. simple. cheap. fair. designed for only thing:
kicking phil’s ass.
To what extent can Nike use trademark law to prevent this “un-marketing” campaign? What defenses can Adbusters offer?
2. Martin Schwimmer offers another hypo for discussion at the Trademark Blog: George W. Bush on The Apprentice:
Comments are open.