The Supreme Court held that a defendant asserting classic fair use in a trademark case bears no burden to negate likelihood of confusion, and some degree of consumer confusion may coexist with a lawful fair use.
The Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act’s false designation of origin provision applies to the physical source of goods, not to the communicative content of expressive works — so unaccredited copying of a public domain film does not violate the Act.
The Supreme Court held that the Federal Trademark Dilution Act requires proof of actual dilution of the famous mark, not merely a likelihood of dilution — a standard Congress later reversed by enacting the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006.
The Supreme Court held that when a product feature was the subject of a utility patent, that prior art disclosure is strong evidence the feature is functional and therefore unprotectable as trade dress under the Lanham Act.