Academic Commons
<!--
Home
$(function()
$("#run")
.button()
.click( function()
$("#search form").trigger("submit");
return false;
);
);
<!--
$('#sidebar').waypoint('sticky',
offset: 30 // Apply "stuck" when element 30px from top
);
CULh_style = 'staticlink'; // limited, staticlink, static, search, standard (default)
CULh_width = 'fluid'; // fixed, fluid (default)
CULh_colorfg = '#002D63'; // topnavbar foreground color. hex value. ex: #002B7F
CULh_colorbg = '#002D63'; // topnavbar background color. hex value. ex: #779BC3
Academic Commons
Home$(function()
$("#run")
.button()
.click( function()
$("#search form").trigger("submit");
return false;
);
);
To Bully or not to Bully: Understanding the Role of Uncertainty in Trademark Enforcement Decisions
Jessica M. Kiser
- Title:
- To Bully or not to Bully: Understanding the Role of Uncertainty in Trademark Enforcement Decisions
- Author(s):
- Kiser, Jessica M.
- Date:
- 2013
- Type:
- Articles
- Department(s):
- Law
- Volume:
- 37
- Persistent URL:
- https://doi.org/10.7916/D8JW8BVB
- Book/Journal Title:
- Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts
- Abstract:
- Companies like Starbucks and Chick-fil-A are routinely labeled trademark bullies. The term “trademark bully” is typically used to describe a large company that uses aggressive intimidation tactics and threats of prolonged trademark infringement litigation to stop small businesses and individuals from using their own trademarks where the stated claims of infringement are likely spurious or non-existent. Trademark bullying harms competition and chills the free speech interests of those seeking to use trademarks for criticism and parody as permitted by the fair use doctrine. This Article identifies two fundamental causes that interact to encourage the aggressive tactics used by trademark bullies. First, trademark law imposes a vague duty on trademark owners to “police” third party trademark use for potential infringement. This uncertain duty renders trademark owners unable to accurately predict the risk of harm that third parties pose to their trademarks. Secondly, inherent cognitive biases affecting evaluations of such risk lead to systematic judgment errors and overestimation of the risk involved, thereby encouraging aggressive trademark enforcement. This Article uses prospect theory, an empirical social science approach to understanding human decision making, to characterize the psychological phenomena, including loss aversion and overestimation of risk, that motivate trademark bullies. Prospect theory explains apparently irrational decision making by trademark bullies. Recently proposed solutions for trademark bullying mistakenly assume that the trademark bully conducts a rational cost-benefit analysis prior to acting. Better solutions require an understanding of the actual psychological processes that underlie these aggressive tactics.
- Subject(s):
Trademarks--Law and legislation
Trademark infringement
Corporations
Bullying
Intellectual property
Law
- Item views
- 2281
- Metadata:
text | xml
- Suggested Citation:
Jessica M. Kiser, 2013, To Bully or not to Bully: Understanding the Role of Uncertainty in Trademark Enforcement Decisions, Columbia University Academic Commons, https://doi.org/10.7916/D8JW8BVB.
Download
<!--
pdf
-->to_bully_or_not_to_bully_understanding_the_role_of_uncertainty.pdf
Share
Helpful Links
Columbia University Libraries |
Policies |
FAQ
$('#sidebar').waypoint('sticky',
offset: 30 // Apply "stuck" when element 30px from top
);
CULh_style = 'staticlink'; // limited, staticlink, static, search, standard (default)
CULh_width = 'fluid'; // fixed, fluid (default)
CULh_colorfg = '#002D63'; // topnavbar foreground color. hex value. ex: #002B7F
CULh_colorbg = '#002D63'; // topnavbar background color. hex value. ex: #779BC3
