Brief Fact Summary.
Jordache appealed a district court judgment ruling that Hogg Wyld was not liable for trademark dilution in mimicking Jordache’s jeans logo.
Synopsis of Rule of Law.
The parody of a trademark does not constitute trademark dilution.
The common law test for likelihood of confusion is the same as the Lanham Act test.View Full Point of Law
Jordache Enterprises, Inc. (Jordache) sued Hogg Wyld, Ltd. (Hogg Wyld) on claims of trademark dilution for mimicking their jean logo that placed the name of the brand over an animal’s head. Jordache placed the brand “Jordache” over a horsehead, while Hogg Wyld placed the brand “Lardashe” and a smiling pig on the seat of the pants. The district court granted judgment to Hogg Wyld.
Whether the parody of a trademark constitutes trademark dilution?
No. Jordache’s and Lardashe’s trademarks are dissimilar and unlikely to be confused. Similarly, parodies exists to increase identification of the original mark, and there is no evidence that Lardashe’s mark is likely to create an association with Jordache. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Trademark dilution occurs when: (1) a likelihood of confusion exists, (2) the challenged image distorts the mental image of the original mark, or (3) the challenged mark tarnishes the original mark due to objectionable characteristics.