请输入您要查询的百科知识：

　

词条 A moron in a hurry
释义

  1. Origins

  2. Case law

     Canada  UK  United States 

  3. See also

  4. References

A moron in a hurry is a legal test for trademark infringement or passing off in which a hypothetical person against whom a claimant's concern might be judged in a civil law action. The expression is used to reject a claim that two items could reasonably be confused by a passer-by: that "only a moron in a hurry" would be confused. If the items offered for sale are distinct, the goodwill and brand of one trader cannot be affected by another's.[1][2]

Origins

The "moron in a hurry" phrase was first used by Mr Justice Foster in the 1978 case Morning Star Cooperative Society v Express Newspapers Limited, in which the publishers of the Morning Star, a British Communist Party publication, sought an injunction to prevent Express Newspapers from launching a new tabloid, which was to be called the Daily Star.[3] The judge ruled against the Morning Star, noting that, "If one puts the two papers side by side I for myself would find that the two papers are so different in every way that only a moron in a hurry would be misled."[3]

In the same year, the phrase was quoted in the same context in the case of Newsweek Inc. v British Broadcasting Corp. [1979] R.P.C. 441 by Lord Denning.[4][5][6]

Case law

Canada

In Canada the phrase was first considered in C.M.S. Industries Ltd. v. UAP Inc. (2002 SKQB 303), where the court held that UAP had infringed the plaintiff's trademark.[7] Four years later, in Mattel, Inc. v. 3894207 Canada Inc., the Supreme Court of Canada moved away from the "moron" analysis, adopting in its place consideration of an "ordinary hurried purchase", a standard between that of a "moron" and a "careful and diligent purchaser".[8] Mattel is now the standard in Canada.

UK

The test was cited by iPhone maker Apple's lawyers in the 2006 lawsuit Apple Corps v Apple Computer, between record label Apple Corps, started by the Beatles in 1968, and Apple Computer Inc.. According to a 1991 agreement, Apple Inc. retained the right to use Apple on "goods or services...used to reproduce, run, play or otherwise deliver...creative works whose principal content is music", but not on content distributed on physical media.[9] Apple Inc.'s lawyers argued that it was not a recording label simply because it distributed music, so it did not violate the agreement. They argued that "[e]ven a moron in a hurry could not be mistaken about" the difference between iTunes and the Apple record label. Furthermore, Apple Corps' logo was a green Granny Smith apple, whereas Apple's logo was a "cartoonish apple with a neat bite out of its side".[10]

The trial opened on March 29, 2006,[11] and the High Court of England and Wales handed down a judgment on May 8, 2006, in favor of Apple Inc.,[12] but the companies did not announce a final settlement until February 5, 2007.

United States

Attorney Marc J. Randazza cited "a moron in a hurry" as a defence in Beck v. Eiland-Hall for his client's use of Glenn Beck's name in a parody website.[13]

See also

  • Man on the Clapham Omnibus
  • Reasonable person ("Reasonable man")
  • Passing off

References

1. ^{{cite news|last=Bronstein |first=Peter |title=Understanding the 'Moron in a Hurry' Test: Is Trademark Law Too Complicated? |url=http://www.businesslawquestion.com/understanding-moron-hurry-test-trademark-law-complicated/ |newspaper=Law Office of Peter Bronstein |date=15 October 2013 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140704143030/http://www.businesslawquestion.com/understanding-moron-hurry-test-trademark-law-complicated/ |archivedate=4 July 2014 }}
2. ^{{Cite web|url=http://thestudentlawyer.com/2014/01/22/understanding-passing-off/|title=Understanding Passing Off|date=22 January 2014|accessdate=7 February 2019}}
3. ^1 {{cite book|first=Jeffrey|last=Miller|title=Where There's Life, There's Lawsuits|isbn= 978-1-55022-501-3|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BkcMEKm_XUYC&pg=PA126|pages=125–126|accessdate=18 February 2014|publisher=ECW Press|date=2003}}
4. ^{{cite journal|publisher=Oxford University Press for the Intellectual Property Office|title=Newsweek Inc. v British Broadcasting Corporation|date=1979|accessdate=18 February 2014|doi=10.1093/rpc/1979rpc441|url=http://rpc.oxfordjournals.org/content/96/20/441|issn=1756-1000|journal=Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases|pages=441–9|volume=96|issue=20}}{{subscription required|date=February 2014}}
5. ^{{Cite journal|last=High Court of Justice|first=Chancery Division|date=1979-01-01|title=Newsweek Inc. v. British Broadcasting Corporation|url=https://academic.oup.com/rpc/article-abstract/96/20/441/1593775/NEWSWEEK-INC-v-BRITISH-BROADCASTING-CORPORATION|journal=Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases|language=en|volume=96|issue=20|pages=441–449|doi=10.1093/rpc/1979rpc441|issn=0080-1364|via=}}
6. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/laws-of-singapore/case-law/free-law/high-court-judgments/21972-the-polo-lauren-company-l-p-v-united-states-polo-association|title=The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v United States Polo Association|last=Choo|first=Han Teck|date=2002-01-18|website=www.singaporelaw.sg|language=en-gb|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=2017-09-13}}
7. ^{{cite web|url=http://canlii.ca/en/sk/skqb/doc/2002/2002skqb303/2002skqb303.html |archive-url=https://archive.is/20140218085129/http://canlii.ca/en/sk/skqb/doc/2002/2002skqb303/2002skqb303.html |dead-url=yes |archive-date=18 February 2014 |title=C.M.S. Industries Ltd. v. UAP Inc., SKQB 303 (CanLII) 2002 |date=22 July 2002 |accessdate=17 February 2014 }}
8. ^{{cite web|url=http://canlii.ca/en/ca/scc/doc/2006/2006scc22/2006scc22.html#par56|date=2006|title=Mattel, Inc. v. 3894207 Canada Inc., 2006 SCC 22, [2006] 1 SCR 772|accessdate=17 February 2014}}
9. ^{{cite web | last =Borland | first =John | last2 =Fried | first2 =Ina | title =Apple vs. Apple: Perfect harmony? | publisher =CNET | date =23 September 2006 | url =http://news.cnet.com/Apple+vs.+Apple+Perfect+harmony/2100-1027_3-5378401.html | accessdate =1 March 2007 }}
10. ^{{cite news|last=Associated Press|title=Apple Defends Its Use of Logo on iTunes Store|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/technology/31apple.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=31 March 2006}}
11. ^{{cite news | title =Apple Giants Do Battle in Court |publisher=BBC News | date =29 March 2006 | url =http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4854408.stm | accessdate =1 March 2007 | archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20070310190321/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4854408.stm| archivedate= 10 March 2007 | deadurl= no}}
12. ^{{cite news | last =Brandie | first =Lars | title =Apple Computer Triumphs In Beatles Case | work =Billboard| date =8 May 2006 | url =http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/58508/apple-computer-triumphs-in-beatles-case }}
13. ^{{cite news|last=Anderson|first=Nate|title=Memes strike back: Gerbils, gay blood elves, and Glenn Beck|url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/09/memes-strike-back-gerbils-gay-blood-elves-and-glenn-beck/|newspaper=Ars Technica|date=30 September 2009}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Moron In A Hurry, A}}

4 : English phrases|Informal legal terminology|Trademark law|Words and phrases introduced in 1978
随便看

　

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。

　

Copyright © 2023 OENC.NET All Rights Reserved
京ICP备2021023879号 更新时间：2024/9/30 0:21:52