Computer Law Review and Technology Journal
Abstract
The proponent of a product design trade dress must show that the trade dress is non-functional. In 2001, the Supreme Court considered functionality in the context of a patented, dual-spring mechanism for temporary road signs, which were designed to withstand strong gusts of wind. In reversing the lower court's summary judgment, the Sixth Circuit held that the availability of spring mechanisms, functionally equivalent but with a different appearance, rendered the dual-spring mechanism non-functional.The Supreme Court reversed, finding instead that the TrafFix dual-spring design was functional as a matter of law. The Court thus held that the availability of functionally equivalent, alternative designs of differing appearance was immaterial.
Recommended Citation
John M. Cone,
Trademark Challenges,
9
Computer L. Rev. & Tech. J.
165
(2004)
