Adidas Suffers Defeat in Trademark Dispute with Church
In the realm of trademark law, a principle known as the de minimis exception plays a significant role in determining whether the use of a trademark in commerce is actionable under the Lanham Act. This legal principle allows for the disregard of very small or trivial uses of a trademark that are unlikely to cause confusion or harm in commerce.
The de minimis exception serves to acknowledge that not all uses of a trademark in commerce constitute infringement—only those that surpass a minimal threshold of significance or impact. This interpretation helps balance protecting trademark owners with avoiding undue restrictions on minor, non-commercial, or insignificant uses.
Recent developments in court cases demonstrate the practical application of this principle. For instance, in a case that took place in the Netherlands, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit blocked adidas from registering a trademark that sounded confusingly similar to a trademark registered by a small church. The church's trademark, "Add a Zero," was used for a fundraiser where donors added an extra zero to their donations. However, the sale of two hats using their trademark to a parishioner who lived within five miles of the church was considered too small ("de minimis") to count as "use in commerce."
This case highlights the importance of the de minimis exception in trademark law. It demonstrates how courts may apply this exception to avoid penalizing trivial or incidental trademark uses that do not meaningfully affect the marketplace or brand distinctiveness.
While this article does not delve into specific case law citing the de minimis exception under the Lanham Act, understanding its implications can provide valuable context for evaluating trademark infringement claims. For a more comprehensive understanding, one typically looks into trademark infringement case law discussing minimal uses or nominal uses in commerce vs. actionable infringement.
In conclusion, the de minimis exception limits the scope of the Lanham Act’s reach, ensuring that minor, non-commercial, or insignificant uses of a trademark are not automatically considered infringement. This principle aligns with broader principles of trademark enforcement and can influence how courts evaluate claims of infringement, as demonstrated in the adidas and church case in the Netherlands.
In the context of balancing trademark owner protection and avoiding undue restrictions, the de minimis exception acknowledges that not all uses of a trademark in business constitute infringement, only those with a minimal threshold of significance or impact.
A practical example showcasing this principle is the adidas and church case in the Netherlands, where the court blockaded adidas from registering a confusingly similar trademark due to the minor, non-commercial use of "Add a Zero" by the church, with sale of hats to a parishioner being deemed too small ("de minimis") to qualify as use in business.
