Quick Summary
Qualitex Co. (plaintiff) sued Jacobson Products Co. (defendant) for trademark infringement over the use of a green-gold color on press pads. Their dispute questioned whether color alone could be protected under trademark law.
After lower courts disagreed on whether color can serve as a trademark, the Supreme Court held that color could be registered as a trademark when it has acquired secondary meaning and does not serve a significant function.
Thus, Qualitex’s green-gold color was protected as a trademark because it met these criteria.
Facts of the Case
Qualitex Co. (plaintiff), operating in the dry cleaning industry, had been using a special green-gold color on its press pads for decades. This distinct color became associated with Qualitex’s products. Jacobson Products Co. (defendant), a competitor in the market, began selling press pads using a similar green-gold color.
In response, Qualitex registered the green-gold color as a trademark with the Patent and Trademark Office and subsequently filed a trademark infringement suit against Jacobson, asserting that Jacobson’s use of the green-gold color on its press pads constituted trademark infringement.
The legal dispute centered around whether color alone can be protected under trademark law, which typically covers words, names, symbols, and devices that identify and distinguish goods. The case escalated through the court system as the parties contested the applicability of trademark protection to color alone, without any accompanying logo or graphic design.
Procedural Posture and History
- The trial court ruled in favor of Qualitex, granting them judgment on their trademark infringement claim.
- The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the trial court’s decision, holding that color alone cannot be registered as a trademark.
- Qualitex then petitioned the United States Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to resolve the dispute.
I.R.A.C. Format
Issue
Whether the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act) allows for the registration of a trademark that consists purely and simply of a color.
Rule of Law
Under the Lanham Act, trademarks may include any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, which can serve as an identifier for goods to signify their source. The Act allows for non-conventional trademarks such as color to be registered if they meet legal trademark requirements and have acquired secondary meaning without being functional or essential to the product itself.
Reasoning and Analysis
The Supreme Court unanimously held that colors can sometimes meet the legal requirements for use as a trademark when they have acquired secondary meaning and do not serve a significant function other than source identification.
The Court found no reason within trademark law objectives to disqualify color as a potential trademark, so long as it does not infringe on the functionality doctrine or deplete the supply of usable colors for other competitors.
The Court rejected Jacobson’s arguments that recognizing color as a trademark would lead to ‘shade confusion’, color depletion, and hinder competition.
Instead, the Court emphasized that concerns about functionality and competition could be addressed through careful application of existing legal doctrines like the functionality doctrine, which prevents the use of essential product features as trademarks.
Conclusion
The judgment of the Ninth Circuit was reversed, allowing Qualitex to use the green-gold color as a trademark.
Key Takeaways
- Color can serve as a trademark if it meets legal requirements and has acquired secondary meaning.
- The functionality doctrine protects against anti-competitive consequences that might arise from granting trademark protection to product features.
- The Lanham Act’s liberalization allows for broader protection of marks beyond traditional words and symbols.
- The Supreme Court’s decision in this case clarified that non-conventional trademarks like color are permissible under certain conditions.
Relevant FAQs of this case
What constitutes secondary meaning in trademark law?
Secondary meaning arises when, through extensive and exclusive use, a mark comes to be recognized by consumers as identifying the source of a product rather than just the product itself.
- For example: A red sole on high-end women’s shoes may not inherently indicate origin, but over time, it becomes associated with a particular luxury shoe designer.
How does functionality doctrine limit trademark eligibility?
The functionality doctrine precludes trademark protection for features dictated by the utilitarian purpose of the product, as this would grant the owner a monopoly over a useful product feature.
- For example: A company cannot trademark the round shape of a wheel since it is essential to the wheel’s function of rolling smoothly.
What are the potential competitive effects of allowing color as a trademark?
While color can be trademarked, if done excessively, it might restrict competitors from effectively branding or distinguishing their products, leading to an anti-competitive market condition.
- For example: If one company trademarked all shades of blue for refrigerators, competitors would be at a disadvantage in designing visually appealing products in that category.
References
Was this case brief helpful?