Opinion ID: 786737
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Dilution As Distinct From Infringement

Text: 44 The law governing dilution is independent from the law attendant to claims of trademark infringement. Kellogg Co. v. Exxon Corp., 209 F.3d at 576. Dilution law, unlike traditional trademark infringement law ... is not based on a likelihood of confusion standard, but only exists to protect the quasi-property rights a holder has in maintaining the integrity and distinctiveness of his mark. Kellogg Co. v. Toucan Golf, Inc., 337 F.3d at 628. Courts recognize two principal forms of dilution: tarnishing and blurring.... Dilution by blurring, the injury at issue here, occurs when consumers see the plaintiff's mark used on a plethora of different goods and services ... raising the possibility that the mark will lose its ability to serve as a unique identifier of the plaintiff's product. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Natural Answers, Inc., 233 F.3d 456, 466 (7th Cir.2000) (quotations and citation omitted) (second alteration in original). 45 The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (FTDA), Pub.L. No. 104-98, 109 Stat. 985 (1995), seeks to prevent both of these forms of dilution by protecting the trademark owner from the erosion of the distinctiveness and prestige of a trademark caused by ... a proliferation of borrowings, that while not degrading the original seller's mark, are so numerous as to deprive the mark of its distinctiveness and hence impact. Id. (quotations omitted) (alteration in original). Section 43(c) of the amended Lanham Act provides, 46 The owner of a famous mark shall be entitled, subject to the principles of equity and upon such terms as the court deems reasonable, to an injunction against another person's commercial use in commerce of a mark or trade name, if such use begins after the mark has become famous and causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the mark, and to obtain such other relief as is provided in this subsection. 47 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1). Dilution is defined by the FTDA as the lessening of the capacity of a famous mark to identify and distinguish goods or services, regardless of the presence or absence of [] (1) competition between the owner of the famous mark and other parties, or (2) likelihood of confusion, mistake, or deception. 15 U.S.C. § 1127. The Tennessee state dilution statute is similar to the federal dilution statute. It reads, 48 The owner of a mark which is famous in this state shall be entitled, subject to the principles of equity and upon such terms as the court deems reasonable, to an injunction against another person's commercial use of a mark or trade name, if such use begins after the mark has become famous and causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the mark, and to obtain such other relief as is provided in this section. 49 Tenn.Code Ann. 47-25-513(a). There are no Tennessee cases that analyze this statute, and in the past we have interchangeably analyzed the Tennessee and federal antidilution statutes. Kellogg Co. v. Exxon Corp., 209 F.3d at 577.