Trademark Protection and Territoriality Challenges in a Global Economy
Show Less

Trademark Protection and Territoriality Challenges in a Global Economy

Edited by Irene Calboli and Edward Lee

As the modern business world becomes increasingly decentralized and globally focused, traditional interpretations and applications of trademark protection law are facing greater and greater challenges. This is particularly true regarding the principle of trademark territoriality, which holds that trademark rights are bound by the laws of individual nations. This timely volume offers expert analyses of the challenges facing crucial aspects of trademark law from some of the most prominent scholars in the field.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 4: The Pan-American Trademark Convention of 1929: a bold vision of extraterritorial meets current realities

Christine Haight Farley


In 1990, the Federal Circuit reaffirmed the principle of territoriality, a central tenet of U.S. and international trademark law. That principle holds that trademark rights are bound by national borders. This non-controversial principle led to a harsh result for a sympathetic plaintiff in Personís Co. v. Christman. Larry Christman, a U.S. citizen and an employee of a sportswear wholesaler, took a business trip to Japan. While there, he visited a Personís Co. clothing store. Christman purchased several items of clothing bearing the Personís logo. When he returned home, he developed a clothing line based on the products he purchased from Personís Co. Many items were copied wholesale. The resulting clothing items were marked with the Personís logo bearing the same globe design used by the Personís Co. Christman obtained a registration for the Personís mark in the U.S. a few years later. During that same period, the Japanese Personís mark had become a well-known mark in Japan. Additionally, Personís Co. was in the process of expanding its business to the U.S., apparently unbeknownst to Christman. Significantly, Christmanís goods made it to market seven months before the Japanese goods, and Christman preceded the Personís Co. to the trademark office. Nevertheless, Personís Co. sought to cancel Christmanís Personís mark based on its prior foreign use, and due to the registrantís bad faith.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.