Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T08:30:52.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

39 - The German Misappropriation Origins of Trademark Antidilution Doctrine: A Translation of the 1924 Odol Opinion of the Elberfeld Landgericht

from C - (Un-)fairness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 December 2020

Niklas Bruun
Affiliation:
Hanken School of Economics (Finland)
Graeme B. Dinwoodie
Affiliation:
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Marianne Levin
Affiliation:
Stockholm University Department of Law
Ansgar Ohly
Affiliation:
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Faculty of Law
Get access

Summary

Frank Schechter introduced the concept of trademark dilution to American readers in his 1927 Harvard Law Review article “The Rational Basis of Trademark Protection.”2 He concluded the article by noting that his formulation of the concept “is fortified by the doctrine that has developed within recent years in German law on this same point.”3 In waiting until the end of his article to refer to the German case law, Schechter effectively implied that dilution was a home-grown American idea – indeed, that it was Schechter’s own, original idea – and that the German courts just happened to have come up with a similar notion. In fact, Schechter appears to have taken the concept of trademark dilution and much of the rhetoric he used in describing it – including “selling power” and the very term “dilution” – from a single German trial court opinion, specifically, the opinion of the Elberfeld Landgericht in the 1924 Odol case.4 The enormous significance of the Odol opinion for American and global trademark law still remains unappreciated. In honor of Annette Kur’s path-breaking and decades-long work in forging mutual understanding between the European and American trademark law systems, presented here is the first full translation into English of the Odol opinion, trademark dilution’s “ur-case.”5

Type
Chapter
Information
Transition and Coherence in Intellectual Property Law
Essays in Honour of Annette Kur
, pp. 460 - 466
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×