Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-704_4246.pdf
Page Number: 20

16 

VIDAL v. ELSTER 

Opinion of the Court 

law” rather than writing trademark law from scratch.  Re-
statement  §9,  Comment  e;  see  also  W.  Derenberg,  Trade-
Mark  Protection  and  Unfair  Trade  22  (1936)  (explaining 
that the “function [of federal trademark law] is essentially
an  evidential  one,  reflecting  the  underlying  common  law 
trade-mark  right  with  the  existence  of  which  it  rises  and
falls”).  It  is  thus  unsurprising  that  the  Lanham  Act  in-
cluded the names clause, prohibiting the registration of a
mark containing “a name . . . identifying a particular living
individual  except  by  his  written  consent.”    §1052(c).  The 
names clause reflects the common law’s careful treatment 
of names when it comes to trademarks. 

The  restriction  on  trademarking  names  also  reflects 
trademark  law’s  historical  rationale  of  identifying  the 
source of goods.  See Hanover Star Milling Co. v. Metcalf, 
240 U. S. 403, 412 (1916) (“The primary and proper function
of a trade-mark is to identify the origin or ownership of the 
article to which it is affixed”); accord, post, at 8 (opinion of 
BARRETT, J.).  Trademark protection ensures that consum-
ers know the source of a product and can thus evaluate it 
based  upon  the  manufacturer’s  reputation  and  goodwill. 
See  Restatement  §9,  Comment  b;  see  also  Powell  v.  Bir-
mingham Vinegar Brewery Co., 13 Rep. Pat. Cas. 235, 250
(Ct. App. 1896) (Lindley, L. J.) (“His mark, as used by him, 
has  given  a  reputation  to  his  goods.    His  trade  depends
greatly on such reputation.  His mark sells his goods”).  By
barring  a  person  from  using  another’s  name,  the  names 
clause  reflects  the  traditional  rationale  of  ensuring  that 
consumers make no mistake about who is responsible for a
product.  See also Hanover Star Milling Co., 240 U. S., at 
412–413  (“The  essence  of  the  wrong  [for  trademark  in-
fringement] consists in the sale of the goods of one manu-
facturer or vendor for those of another”). 

Moreover, the names clause respects the established con-
nection between a trademark and its protection of the mark-