Federal trademark law can't stop an individual from expressing an opinion about the validity of a mark. That was the holding last week from the Ninth Circuit in The Freecycle Network, Inc. v. Oey.
In that case, defendant made statements on the internet to the effect that the term "freecycle" is a generic term -- referring to a practice where people give to others goods they no longer want -- and that The Freecycle Network (TFN) should not obtain a trademark on the term. TFN claimed these statements constituted trademark infringement and trademark disparagement under the Lanham Act, and the District Court agreed, issuing a preliminary injunction against defendant. The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that the law prohibits neither the airing of opinions about trademarks nor statements encouraging others to use a mark in its generic sense.
There's plenty of commentary in the blogosphere supporting the Ninth Circuit's conclusion. See this post on the Likelihood of Confusion blog and this one on The Trademark Blog.
Comments