What was the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the “booking.com” case reference in the text?

题目解析

Question

What was the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the “booking.com” case reference in the text?

题目解析

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question asks for the Supreme Court’s ruling in the referenced “booking.com” case as discussed in the text. 
Option 1: 'A generic term with “.com” attached to it can be a trademark, even if consumers do not perceive it as a generic term.' This aligns with the principle that adding a distinctive domain-style suffix (like .com) to a generic term can create a registrable trademark if the resulting mark is not perceived by consumers as merely generic. The perception of non-generality by consumers can be a key factor in distinctiveness. 
Option 2: 'A generic term with “.com” attached to it can be a trademark in all circumstances, since the addition of “.com” to the generic term distinguishes the term.' The phrase 'in all circumstances' overstates the rule. While the addition of .com can help distinguish, it is not automatically registrable in every possible context or for every term. The court often requires analysis of consumer perception and secondary meaning; thus this blanket claim is overly broad and inaccurate. 
Option 3: 'A generic term with “.com” attached to it can be a trademark if industry experts do not perceive it as a generic term.' Relying on industry expert perception alone is not typically the sole determinant. Trademark distinctiveness and consumer perception are usually evaluated, and expert perception is one input, not a sole gatekeeper. This makes the statement an incomplete and insufficient condition for registrability. 
Option 4: 'A generic term with “.com” attached to it can be a trademark if consumers do not perceive it as a generic term.' This echoes the central idea that consumer perception of the term’s non-generality can support registrability, even when the base term is generic in isolation. It highlights the role of how the public views the mark. 
Option 5: 'A generic term with “.com” attached to it cannot be a trademark.' This is inconsistent with the Booking.com ruling, where the combination with .com can indeed be registrable under appropriate circumstances. The blanket statement here ignores the possible registrability depending on consumer perception and other trademark criteria. 
In evaluating these options, note that the most accurate statements emphasize that registrability can depend on consumer perception and the overall distinctiveness of the mark, rather than asserting universal rules or excluding the possibility outright. The options that acknowledge registrability depending on consumer perception (Options 1 and 4) better reflect the nuanced outcome associated with theBooking.com decision, while those that claim absolute outcomes (Options 2 and 5) or rely solely on industry expert views (Option 3) miss critical components of trademark analysis.

What was the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the “booking.com” case reference in the text? 题目解析

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

A trademark can be a word but cannot be a symbol.

Cybersquatting is illegal only if a domain name is identical to the trademark of another, not if the name is merely confusingly similar.

Which of the following are core legal purposes of trademark protection in branding? (Select all that apply.)

Cybersquatting occurs when a company, in good faith, registers an Internet domain name that contains the trademark of another, with the intent to take away business from his competitors

Which of the following is not a factor the Court considers when determining is there has been trademark infringement?

The USPTO monitors encroachment of a registered trademark.

An applicant cannot register a trademark on the basis of an intention to use the mark in commerce.

Once a trademark application has been examined and appears to be eligible for registration, it is published for opposition in the:

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单