Retail Services Inc. v. Freebies Publishing’s Empirical Analysis
364 F.3d 535 · 2004
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 13 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably George & Co. v. Imagination Entertainment Ltd. (2009), Welding Services, Inc. v. Forman (2007)
29 federal appellate · 13 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc. · Fogerty Fantasy Inc · Park 'N Fly, Inc. v. Dollar Park & Fly, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a 'generic' mark which merely employs 'the common name of a product or service ....' " Id. (quoting Sara Lee Corp. v. Kayser-Roth Corp. , 81 F.3d 455 , 464 (4th Cir.1996) ). A mark becomes generic where "the primary significance of the mark [is] its indication of the nature or class of the product or service, rather than [its] indication of source.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“From a policy standpoint ... if a business were permitted to appropriate a generic word as its trademark, it would be difficult for competitors to market their own brands of the same product. Imagine being forbidden to describe a Chevrolet as a 'car' or an 'automobile' ....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause the PTO may not register a generic mark, the fact that a mark is registered is strong evidence that the mark satisfies the statutory requirements for the distinctiveness necessary for trademark protection.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.