In addition, Select Comfort argued that the defendants used their marks in phrases such as "Bed with sleeping number" and "Beds with sleeping number for sale" in hyperlinks on third-party sites that lead to the Personal Comfort website. In addition, Select Comfort was opposed to several uses on the Personal Comfort site, including, for example, the use of "Sleep Number Bed" on the title tag of the Internet Explorer tab; the use of meta tags on the Defendants' websites; and the use of "WHAT IS YOUR NUMBER?" "Bed number" also appears on the Personal Comfort logo:
Somewhat differently, Select Comfort objected to the defendants' use of a "lead generation" website, Mattress Quote. The air Mattress Quote website was created by defendants, and allowed consumers to obtain quotes from several brands, including the Sleep Number and Comfortable products. Although billed as an independent website, Select Comfort submitted evidence that when consumers selected Sleep Number or Comfortable, they received a quote from the defendants. Select Comfort also submitted evidence that, in response to a direct consultation of the Mattress Quote website, the defendants allegedly responded as "Suspension Number." or participated in a live chat.
The court found material factual issues as to whether "Sleep number" and "Number bed" were protective, descriptive, descriptive marks with secondary meaning, generic or even suggestive (Sleep number does not seem suggestive for beds that are adjustable I do not know exactly what it is, but immediately I know there is a range). Similarly, there were de facto problems as to whether the defendants engaged in an unbiased descriptive or nominative use. And there were indeed problems in the possible confusion, with some factors favoring each side and others challenged.
In particular, the court held that it was not appropriate to use the initial interest confusion in this circumstance, where the products are expensive (the average cost of the Select Comfort bed between $ 1,600 and $ 2,300) are purchased online. "These factors lead to the conclusion that consumers would exercise a high degree of care when buying a mattress of this type. Therefore, Plaintiffs' trademark infringement claim will require the Plaintiffs to establish a likelihood of actual confusion at the time of purchase. because the key question in the Select Comfort survey did not prove the confusion of the source (again, according to the defendants). The Defendants' own survey showed only 1.5% confusion regarding the source or affiliation of their ads.
Airbeds:
In the false advertising claims, the defendants argued that Select Comfort lacked legitimacy. He did not, because he had a close enough connection with the false advertising claimed under Lexmark, so this serves primarily as a reminder that has lost the war by calling this investigation "standing up." contested and had to go to a search engine in fact.
The court also found that a jury would have to decide whether the "Dream number" and "What is your dream number?" It was famous according to the rigorous federal standard of dilution. Select Comfort stated that they had spent more than $ 150 million in 2014 and more than $ 1 billion since 2010 in marketing, advertising and promotion of their Sleep Number products in many media. The advertising included "ratings in industry magazines, positive reviews in Consumer Reports, celebrity endorsements and numerous mentions in magazines, newspapers, online, television shows and comics," as well as other references to pop culture. Claimed more than $ 10 billion in sales since 2010, and that in 2012, the "Dream number" achieved a 21% brand recognition without help and 75% of total knowledge.
Comments
Post a Comment