Pirone v. MacMillan, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
894 F.2d 579 · 1990
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 12 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 123 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Gruner + Jahr USA Publishing v. Meredith Corp. (1993), Arrow Fastener Co. v. Stanley Works (1995)
22 federal appellate · 12 district · 5 state decisions
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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (§ 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (§ 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on United States v. Diebold, Inc. · United Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co. · Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n · Heyman v. Commerce & Industry Insurance · Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, 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 123 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] trademark is "not property in the ordinary sense,” but only a word or symbol indicating the origin or source of a product. The owner of the mark acquires the right to prevent his goods from being confused with those of others and to prevent his own trade from being diverted to competitors through their use of misleading marks.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'the name and the business have become synonymous in the mind of the public, submerging the primary meaning of the term in favor of its meaning as a word identifying that business.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'[t]here is no such thing as property in a trade-mark except as a right appurtenant to an established business or trade in connection with which the mark is employed.'”
3 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.