Study On The Aesthetic Functionality Of Trademark Law In The United States

In order to prevent trademark over-protection from hindering free competition, functional marks cannot enjoy trademark protection has become a consensus all over the world. Traditionally speaking, if a product feature could contribute to the realization of the product’s function in a technical way, such feature would be deemed as functional and thus be deprived of trademark protection. This is the so-called utilitarian functional. With the development of social economy and the enlargement of business field, a corresponding concept, aesthetic functional has arised in legal practice. It refers to those product features that may not mechanically contribute to the realization of the product’s function, but may endows the product an exclusive competitive advantage in an aesthetic sense. However, ever since the proposal of this theory, it has received great controversy for its vague definition, feeble theoretical basis and confused application criteria. In the United States where this theory arises, although the Supreme Court indirectly addressed this issue in two cases, many district courts still challenge its rightfulness and rationality and therefore refuse to accept the doctrine. In this regard, the application of this doctrine is still in a mess in the legal practice of the United States.Why is this doctrine so controversial? What is aesthetic functionality? Where does this doctrine originate and how does it develop? What is its theoretical basis and is it a necessary doctrine? Since aesthetic functionality has grown with the development American legal practice, this article will explore relevant precedents in order to find the answers.This article first introduces the functionality doctrine and the concept of aesthetic functionality in the trademark field. Then it briefly analyses the value of functionality doctrine.In the second part of this article, it mainly focuses on the judicial precedents of the United States. By analyzing relevant articles for the past 60 years, this article concludes the development of aesthetic functionality to a vertical timeline and picks classic precedents in every phase for further research.In the third part, this article conducts a value analysis of the aesthetic functionality doctrine. It turns out that the doctrine lacks rightfulness and rationality and may even hinder competition. Through comparison of different precedents issued by different courts, this article finds that the application of this doctrine is in a mess in legal practice. This article further argues that aesthetic functionality is an unnecessary doctrine as the existed utilitarian functionality and distinctiveness theory are enough to prevent those inappropriate subjects from trademark protection.The forth part is the conclusion of this article.Aesthetic functionality is still a forefront issue in the trademark field. Scholars are paying more and more attention but still find it hard to reach a consensus. Therefore the study of this doctrine is of certain value. This article conducts an in-depth research on the origin of the doctrine and has provided a new way of thinking for further researches.