The Court held that the Lanham Act (the federal trademark statute) does not apply extraterritorially and that a domestic application of the statute requires use of the trademark in domestic commerce. Regarding the presumption against extraterritoriality more broadly, the majority emphasized that conduct related to a non-extraterritorial statute's focus must occur in the United States, even if the focus itself is not about conduct.
Fifth Circuit Interprets Copyright Termination and Renewal Provisions to Apply Worldwide
In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has relied increasingly on the presumption against extraterritoriality to determine the geographic scope of federal statutes. This presumption seems particularly strong for intellectual property statutes. Most recently, the Court strictly applied the presumption against extraterritoriality to the Lanham Act (the federal trademark statute) in Abitron Austria GmbH v….
Continue ReadingTrademark Infringement and Exports after Abitron
Two years ago, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. (2023), the Supreme Court applied the presumption against extraterritoriality to the federal trademark statute (the Lanham Act), holding that the Act applies only to domestic conduct. Abitron involved imports. Products bearing an infringing trademark were made abroad, some of which were sold, directly or…
Continue ReadingAbitron on Remand
Last year, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the federal trademark statute—known as the Lanham Act—applies only to domestic conduct infringing U.S. trademarks. A group of Austrian and German companies collectively known as “Abitron” placed U.S.-protected trademarks owned by a U.S. company, Hetronic, on products made in Europe. Some of…
Continue Reading