A game of confusion – Court addresses “likelihood” vs. “absence of actual”

Description

Abstract: Trademark disputes typically turn on whether a likelihood of confusion exists between two marks — but, in a case involving the use of two universities’ similar logos, an appeals court held that a lack of evidence of actual confusion isn’t necessarily the final word on the likelihood-of-confusion issue. The court looked at three factors relevant to whether a likelihood of confusion exists: 1) the similarity of trade channels, 2) the care consumers employ when purchasing the goods, and 3) the absence of evidence of actual confusion.