Our analysis is not mechanical, but rather, focuses on the ultimate question of whether, looking at the products in their totality, consumers are likely to be confused. The eight factors are:
(1) strength of the trademark;
(2) similarity of the marks;
(3) proximity of the products and their competitiveness with one another;
(4) evidence that the senior user may â€œbridge the gapâ€ by developing a product for sale in the market of the alleged infringerâ€™s product;
(5) evidence of actual consumer confusion;
(6) evidence that the imitative mark was adopted in bad faith;
(7) respective quality of the products; and
(8) sophistication of consumers in the relevant market.
Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics, Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961); Nora Beverages, Inc. v. Perrier Group of Am., Inc., 269 F.3d 114, 119 (2d Cir. 2001).