Interest Balance Of Well-known Trademark Parody

Parody was once exclusively used in copyright, and has established as fair use under copyright law. This thesis defines Well-know trademark parody and summarizes its features by comparing copyright right with trademark right. Whether parody can be establish as fair use under trademark system? To answer this question, this thesis, from three different perspectives, analysis the reasonable grounds of parody under trademark law. Conclusions were subsequently drawn: Parodying is a way to exercise people's constitutional right-Free of Speech. In addition, parody does not conflict with trademark right in its essence. Furthermore, parody is consistent with trademark law's objective in protecting consumer's interests. Even if parody has its profound reasonable grounds, it cannot be protected absolutely as it usually acts as a double edged sword-infringement may be unconsciously caused. How to strike balance between parody protection and trademark protection? With an in-depth analysis of trademark right, this thesis argues that infringement should not be considered if parody is not used to identify source of products. Even if the parody is used as an identifier, infringement does not necessarily exist. Interest of public free speech should be weighted against the interest of trademark owner in different cases before decisions are entered. Traditionally, there were several factors to be applied to assess if trademark confusion or dilution exists. This thesis argues that parody should be treated different from the traditionally alleged infringing acts as parody may contains infringing factors and interest of free speech at the same time. Thus, in evaluating if a parody consists of trademark infringement or dilution, the traditional factors should be modified slightly.