Trade Dress as an Asset of Intellectual Property: A Vision from the North American Legal Thought
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21803/penamer.18.38.888Keywords:
Trade Dress, Intellectual Property, North American Legal Thought, Unfair Competition, Three-Dimensional TrademarksAbstract
Introduction: Trade dress, understood as the set of distinctive visual elements of a product or establishment, is a valuable intangible asset for companies. Not surprisingly, although there are various legal avenues for its protection, such as copyright, industrial designs, or unfair competition, these have significant limitations in terms of their duration and evidentiary scope. Objective: To analyze, with a focus
on American legal thinking, the most effective means of protection for trade dress. Methodology: A hermeneutic-systematic approach and a documentary analysis of doctrine and jurisprudence from databases such as Scopus and JSTOR were used, selecting American doctrine as a pioneer in this field. Results: Analysis of the different solutions and landmark cases in the US showed that the protection of trade dress, whether in the field of architecture or packaging design, depends on the requirements of distinctiveness and non-functionality. Conclusions: Protection through distinctive signs, specifically three-dimensional trademarks, appears to be the most effective and lasting route. This strategy not only safeguards business investment but also prevents consumer confusion and facilitates the construction of a solid brand identity.
Downloads
References
Barrett, M. (2004). Consolidating the Diffuse Paths to Trade Dress Functionality: Encountering TrafFix on the Way to Sears. WASh. & lee l. reV., 61, 79. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol61/iss1/3/
Berzins, I. K. (2003). The Emerging Circuit Split over Secondary Meaning in Trade Dress Law. U. Pa. L. Rev., 152, 1661. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol152/iss5/3
Byerly, L. M. (1998). Look and Feel Protection of Web Site User Interfaces: Copyright or Trade Dress? Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. LJ, 14, 221. https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol14/iss1/4
Cohen, A. B. (2009). Following the direction of Traffix: Trade dress law and functionality revisited. Idea, 50, 593. https://digitalcommons.law.wne.edu/facschol/82/
Davis Jr, T. H. (1995). Copying in the Shadow of the Constitution: The Rational Limits of Trade Dress Protection. Minn. L. Rev., 80, 595. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/2408/
De Almeida, X. V. (2015). As possibilidades de proteção ao trade dress. Direito & Justiça, 41(2), 248-263. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7718.2015.2.13642
De Carvalho Leal, V., Teixeira-Esteves, J., Montesinos-Padilha, C., Vargas-Chaves, I., & Uscanga-Barradas, A. (2018). Conflitos e novos desafios do direito: Política, meio ambiente e novas tecnologias. Editora RTM / Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Dinwoodie, G. B. (1996). Reconceptualizing the inherent distinctiveness of product design trade dress. NCL Rev., 75, 471. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003376040
Dinwoodie, G. B., Janis, M. D., & Du Mont, J. (2024). Trade dress and design law. Aspen Publishing.
Dowell, A. E. (1994). Trade Dress Protection of Product Designs: Stifling the Progress of Science and the Useful Arts for an Unlimited Time. Notre Dame L. Rev., 70, 137. https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol70/iss1/4/
Dratler Jr, J. (1996). Trade Dress Protection for Product Configurations: Is There a Conflict With Patent Policy. AIPLA QJ, 24, 427. https://works.bepress.com/jay_dratler/4/
Edelstein, J. S., & Lueders, C. L. (2000). Recent Developments in Trade Dress Infrigement Law. IDEA, 40, 105. https://ipmall.info/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/IDEA/4.Edelstein00.pdf
Finch, A. C. (1996). When imitation is the sincerest form of flattery: Private label products and the role of intention in determining trade dress infringement. The University of Chicago Law Review, 63(3), 1243-1276. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol63/iss3/9/
García Velasco, I. C. (2017). Trade dress, imagen empresarial o apariencia distintiva: como objeto de protección dentro de una franquicia. Revista Republicana, 22, 231-257. http://dx.doi.org/10.21017/Rev.Repub.2017.v22.a27
Gaske, W. F. (1988). Trade Dress Protection: Inherent Distinctiveness as an Alternative to Secondary Meaning. Fordham L. Rev., 57, 1123. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol57/iss6/17/
Gleiberman, M. R. (1993). From Fast Cars to Fast Food: Overbroad Protection of Product Trade Dress Under Section 43 (a) of the Lanham Act. Stanford Law Review, 2037-2072.
Greene, J. A., & Kesselheim, A. S. (2011). Why do the same drugs look different? Pills, trade dress, and public health. New England Journal of Medicine, 365(1), 83-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMhle1101722
Hammersley, F. M. (1998). The smell of success: Trade dress protection for scent marks. Marq. Intell. Prop. L. Rev., 2, 105. https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/iplr/vol2/iss1/4/
Harvey, M., Rothe, J. T., & Lucas, L. A. (1998). The “trade dress” controversy: A case of strategic cross-brand cannibalization. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 6(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.1998.11501791
Horta, R. J. (1993). Without Secondary Meaning, Do Product Design Trade Dress Protections Function as Infinite Patents. Suffolk UL Rev., 27, 113.
Japanese Intellectual Property High Court, Case No. 10215, 2007, Sentencia de 29 de mayo de 2008.
Karki, M. (2005). Nontraditional areas of intellectual property protection: Colour, sound, taste, smell, shape, slogan and trade dress. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 10. 499-506.
Kellner, L. F. (1994). Trade Dress Protection for Computer User Interface Look and Feel. U. Chi. L. Rev., 61, 1011. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4841&context=uclrev
Kratzke, W. P. (2001). The Supreme Court and Trade Dress-A Short Comment. Hastings Comm. & Ent. LJ, 24, 73. https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol24/iss1/3/
Lunney Jr, G. S. (1999). The Trade Dress Emperor's New Clothes: Why Trade Dress Does Not Belong on the Principal Register. Hastings LJ, 51, 1131. https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/552/
Opderbeck, D. W. (1999). An Economic Perspective on Product Configuration Trade Dress. Seton Hall Legis. J., 24, 327. https://scholarship.shu.edu/shlj/vol24/iss2/5/
Perez, M. S. (1995). Reconciling the Patent Act and the Lanham Act: Should Product Configurations Be Entitled to Trade Dress Protection after the Expiration of a Utility or Design Patent. Tex. Intell. Prop. LJ, 4, 383. https://tiplj.org/wp-content/uploads/Volumes/v4/v4p383.pdf
Prowda, J. B. (1997). The Trouble with Trade Dress Protection of Product Design. Alb. L. Rev., 61, 1309.
Ramírez-Montes, C. J. (2019). The elusive distinctiveness of trade dress in EU trademark law. Emory Int'l L. Rev., 34, 277. https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol34/iss1/2/
Rogers, E. (1914). Good Will, trademarks and unfair trading. A. W. Shaw Company.
Sandberg, S. C. (2009). Trade Dress: what does it mean. Franchise LJ, 29, 10.
Schultz, A. B. (1976). Trade Dress and Unfair Competition in Publishing and Packaging. Brook. L. Rev., 43, 654.
Shpetner, M. A. (1997). Determining a proper test for inherent distinctiveness in trade dress. Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. LJ, 8, 947. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/iplj/vol8/iss3/6
Shroder, W. J. (1911). Price Restriction on the Re-sale of Chattels. Harvard Law Review, 25(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/1324997
Smith, L. (2005). Trade Distinctiveness: Solving Scalia's Tertium Quid Trade Dress Conundrum. Mich. St. L. Rev., 243. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=916553
Straus, N. (2012). Trade dress protection for cuisine: Monetizing creativity in a low-IP industry. UCLA L. Rev., 60, 182. https://www.uclalawreview.org/trade-dress-protection-for-cuisine-monetizing-creativity-in-a-low-ip-industry/
Supreme Court of the United States, Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation, 1995. https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F2/774/774.F2d.1116.84- 1416.html
Supreme Court of the United States, Publications International, Ltd., v. Landoll, Inc., 1998. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1179464.html
Supreme Court of the United States, Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., 1995. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1577.ZO.html
Supreme Court of the United States, Two Pesos Inc., 1992. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/763/case.html
Supreme Court of the United States, Walmart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Brothers, Inc., 2000. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-150.ZO.html
Terakura, K. K. (2000). Insufficiency of trade dress protection: Lack of guidance for trade dress infringement litigation in the fashion design industry. U. Haw. L. Rev., 22, 569.
The Embellished Life (2011). What I’m Reading in Fashion News: The Louboutin YSL Case. https://theembellishedlifeblog.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/what-im-reading-in-fashion-news-the-louboutin-ysl-case/
Tribunal de Justicia de la Comunidad Andina, 141-IP-2016.
Warlop, L., & Alba, J. W. (2004). Sincere flattery: Trade-dress imitation and consumer choice. Journal of consumer Psychology, 14(1-2), 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_4
Welkowitz, D. S. (1998). Trade Dress and Patent-The Dilemma of Confusion. Rutgers LJ, 30, 289. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=178348
Wong, M. M. (1997). Aesthetic Funtionality Doctrine and the Law of Trade-Dress Protection. Cornell L. Rev., 83, 1116. : http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol83/iss4/5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Pensamiento Americano
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author or authors of an article accepted for publication in the Journal Pensamiento Americano will transfer all of the patrimonial rights to the American University Corporation free of charge, within which are included: the right to edit, publish, reproduce and distribute both print media as digital, in addition to include in article in international indexes and / or databases, likewise, the Editorial Seal is authorized to use the images, tables and / or any graphic material presented in the article for the design of covers or posters from the same magazine. By assuming the patrimonial rights of the article, it may not be partially or totally reproduced in any printed or digital media without its express permission.
AUTHORITY ASPECTS
For the Pensamiento Americano Journal, all the authors of an article have made substantial contributions to the research and the manuscript, and they share the responsibility when the article presents errors, fraud in some way or violations of copyright.
After submitting an article, the journal does not accept the addition, deletion or change in the order of the authors, in addition we reserve the right to release the article when it has been submitted to the journal and under no circumstances will American Thought accept the article. withdrawal of an article during any phase of the editorial process
