It began as the case of a clothing manufacturer struggling to protect the designs of its products — or “trade dress” — against knock-offs commissioned by a mass-retail behemoth engaged in fierce competition to give consumers the biggest bang for their bucks.
But when the feud between Wal-Mart and Samara Brothers finally reached the U.S. Supreme Court, it was clear that the case had touched off a debate on one of the most fundamental and vexing questions in trade dress law: When is a product configuration that has not been copyrighted, trademarked, or patented so “inherently distinctive” that it deserves protection from infringement? (Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Samara Brothers Inc., U.S., No. 99-150, argued 1/19/00).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
