Lexplug logoLexplug

Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.

United States Supreme Court
514 U.S. 159 (1995)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A color may be registered as a trademark under the Lanham Act when it has acquired a secondary meaning and is not functional.


Facts:

  • Since the 1950s, Qualitex Company manufactured and sold press pads for dry cleaning presses using a specific green-gold color.
  • Over time, customers in the dry cleaning industry came to associate this green-gold color exclusively with Qualitex's pads.
  • In 1989, Jacobson Products, a competitor of Qualitex, began selling its own press pads colored in a nearly identical green-gold shade.
  • The green-gold color served no utilitarian or functional purpose for the press pads; other colors were equally usable to perform the function of hiding stains.
  • In 1991, Qualitex registered its specific green-gold color as a trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Procedural Posture:

  • Qualitex Company sued Jacobson Products in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California for trademark infringement and unfair competition.
  • The District Court (trial court) found in favor of Qualitex.
  • Jacobson Products, as appellant, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
  • The Court of Appeals (intermediate appellate court), with Qualitex as appellee, reversed the trial court's decision, holding that color alone cannot be registered as a trademark.
  • The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the circuit courts on this issue.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the Lanham Act permit the registration of a trademark that consists solely of a single color?


Opinions:

Majority - Justice Breyer

Yes. The Lanham Act permits a color alone to be registered as a trademark if it meets the ordinary requirements for trademark protection. The Act's broad definition of a trademark as including any 'symbol, or device' does not exclude color. A color can act as a symbol if it acquires 'secondary meaning,' meaning consumers have come to identify the color with a particular source. Furthermore, the functionality doctrine prevents trademark law from inhibiting legitimate competition by barring the registration of features that are 'essential to the use or purpose of the article or if it affects the cost or quality of the article.' This doctrine adequately addresses concerns that allowing color trademarks would deplete the limited supply of colors or put competitors at a significant disadvantage.



Analysis:

This unanimous decision resolved a significant circuit split and established that non-traditional marks, such as a single color, can receive federal trademark protection. The ruling solidified the principle that the central inquiry is whether a mark is source-identifying, rather than its ontological nature. It reinforces the importance of secondary meaning for marks that are not inherently distinctive and underscores the role of the functionality doctrine as a critical check on the scope of trademark rights, ensuring that trademark law does not encroach on patent law by granting perpetual monopolies over useful product features.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. (1995) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.