Michael Atkins says, “Here we go again”:
With the Northern District of California’s understandable decision this week in Phase Forward Inc. v. Adams (STL post here) to follow its appellate court’s lead in Jada Toys, Inc. v. Mattel, Inc. (STL post here), I can’t help but face the fact that we have another split in the circuits over trademark dilution — the very thing the Trademark Dilution Revision Act was supposed to avoid.
If you practice trademark law or love someone who does (and what’s not to love?) you have to read his post!
UPDATE: Shoe drops.